{"title":"低能量飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与传统白内障手术的比较:荟萃分析与系统综述。","authors":"Cyuan-Yi Yeh, Hwa-Shin Fang, You-Ci Ou, Cheng-Kuo Cheng, Tzu-En Wu","doi":"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Topic: </strong>To systematically compare the effectiveness of conventional phacoemulsification surgery (CPS) and low-energy femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) in patients with cataract.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Cataract surgery is a common procedure, and comparing different techniques such as CPS and low-energy FLACS is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases were searched for clinical trials. Outcomes of procedure time, effective phacoemulsification time, balanced salt solution usage, cumulative dissipated energy, mean change of corrected distance visual acuity, endothelial cells reduction, central corneal thickness (CCT), and aqueous cytokine level were evaluated. The effect measures were weighted mean differences with 95% CI. The protocol was registered at the Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (registration number CRD42023420173).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>11 studies were included in this meta-analysis, of which 1680 eyes were analyzed (637 eyes in the low-energy FLACS group and 1043 eyes in the CPS group). Low-energy FLACS demonstrated significantly fewer reductions in endothelial cell count at 6 months ( P < .001) compared with CPS. It also exhibited a shorter effective phacoemulsification time ( P < .001) and less balanced salt solution usage ( P < .001). However, there were no differences in cumulative dissipated energy, corrected distance visual acuity, CCT changes, or aqueous cytokine levels between the 2 groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both low-energy FLACS and CPS are effective in treating cataracts, but low-energy FLACS may offer advantages such as reduced phacoemulsification time and less endothelial cell loss.</p>","PeriodicalId":15214,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","volume":" ","pages":"1074-1082"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of low-energy FLACS and conventional cataract surgery: meta-analysis and systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Cyuan-Yi Yeh, Hwa-Shin Fang, You-Ci Ou, Cheng-Kuo Cheng, Tzu-En Wu\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001501\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Topic: </strong>To systematically compare the effectiveness of conventional phacoemulsification surgery (CPS) and low-energy femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) in patients with cataract.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Cataract surgery is a common procedure, and comparing different techniques such as CPS and low-energy FLACS is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases were searched for clinical trials. Outcomes of procedure time, effective phacoemulsification time, balanced salt solution usage, cumulative dissipated energy, mean change of corrected distance visual acuity, endothelial cells reduction, central corneal thickness (CCT), and aqueous cytokine level were evaluated. The effect measures were weighted mean differences with 95% CI. The protocol was registered at the Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (registration number CRD42023420173).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>11 studies were included in this meta-analysis, of which 1680 eyes were analyzed (637 eyes in the low-energy FLACS group and 1043 eyes in the CPS group). Low-energy FLACS demonstrated significantly fewer reductions in endothelial cell count at 6 months ( P < .001) compared with CPS. It also exhibited a shorter effective phacoemulsification time ( P < .001) and less balanced salt solution usage ( P < .001). However, there were no differences in cumulative dissipated energy, corrected distance visual acuity, CCT changes, or aqueous cytokine levels between the 2 groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both low-energy FLACS and CPS are effective in treating cataracts, but low-energy FLACS may offer advantages such as reduced phacoemulsification time and less endothelial cell loss.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1074-1082\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001501\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001501","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of low-energy FLACS and conventional cataract surgery: meta-analysis and systematic review.
Topic: To systematically compare the effectiveness of conventional phacoemulsification surgery (CPS) and low-energy femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) in patients with cataract.
Clinical relevance: Cataract surgery is a common procedure, and comparing different techniques such as CPS and low-energy FLACS is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes.
Methods: The PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases were searched for clinical trials. Outcomes of procedure time, effective phacoemulsification time, balanced salt solution usage, cumulative dissipated energy, mean change of corrected distance visual acuity, endothelial cells reduction, central corneal thickness (CCT), and aqueous cytokine level were evaluated. The effect measures were weighted mean differences with 95% CI. The protocol was registered at the Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (registration number CRD42023420173).
Results: 11 studies were included in this meta-analysis, of which 1680 eyes were analyzed (637 eyes in the low-energy FLACS group and 1043 eyes in the CPS group). Low-energy FLACS demonstrated significantly fewer reductions in endothelial cell count at 6 months ( P < .001) compared with CPS. It also exhibited a shorter effective phacoemulsification time ( P < .001) and less balanced salt solution usage ( P < .001). However, there were no differences in cumulative dissipated energy, corrected distance visual acuity, CCT changes, or aqueous cytokine levels between the 2 groups.
Conclusions: Both low-energy FLACS and CPS are effective in treating cataracts, but low-energy FLACS may offer advantages such as reduced phacoemulsification time and less endothelial cell loss.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery (JCRS), a preeminent peer-reviewed monthly ophthalmology publication, is the official journal of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) and the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS).
JCRS publishes high quality articles on all aspects of anterior segment surgery. In addition to original clinical studies, the journal features a consultation section, practical techniques, important cases, and reviews as well as basic science articles.