Trial reportOphthalmology2020
Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery Versus Phacoemulsification Cataract Surgery (FACT): A Randomized Noninferiority Trial.
Trial report in Ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Laser-assisted cataract surgery versus standard ultrasound phacoemulsification cataract surgery.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery compared with phacoemulsification: the FACT non-inferiority RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2021Trial
- Effectiveness of Topical Anesthesia in Patients Undergoing Phacoemulsification Cataract Surgery versus Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Micro-interventional pre-treatment for nucleus disassembly in the setting of non-cavitating sonic lensectomy: real-world evidence study in 512 cases.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Efficiency Comparison Between Two Different Lasers and Cataract Surgery Workflows: A Prospective and Retrospective Analysis.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Surgical considerations in hyperopic cataract patients: optimizing outcomes and reducing complications.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Randomized controlled bilateral comparison of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus conventional phacoemulsification.BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies · 2025Article
- Incidence and analysis of intraoperative complications in femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery: a large-scale cohort study to establish the learning curve.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Comparative analysis of changes in retinal layer thickness following femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery and conventional cataract surgery.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Intraoperative quantitative crystalline lens nuclear opacities analysis based on crystalline lenSx platform.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Update on Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery: A Review.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Review
- The Royal College of Ophthalmologists' National Ophthalmology Database study of cataract surgery: report 16, influence of remuneration model on choice of intraocular lens in the UK.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- Prophylaxis of posterior capsule opacification through autophagy activation with indomethacin-eluting intraocular lens.Bioactive materials · 2023Article
- Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery versus Conventional Phacoemulsification Surgery: Clinical Outcomes with EDOF IOLs.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Comparison of clinical outcomes between cystotome-assisted prechop phacoemulsification surgery and femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery for hard nucleus cataracts.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- Comparison of complication rates between femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery and conventional phacoemulsification cataract surgery.International journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Big data in corneal diseases and cataract: Current applications and future directions.Frontiers in big data · 2023Review
- Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery: Update and perspectives.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo report the 3-month results of a randomized trial (Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Trial [FACT]) comparing femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) with standard phacoemulsification cataract surgery (PCS).
designMulticenter, randomized controlled trial funded by the UK National Institute of Health Research (HTA 13/04/46/).
participantsSeven hundred eighty-five patients with age-related cataract.
methodsThis trial took place in 3 hospitals in the UK National Health Service (NHS). Randomization (1:1) was stratified by site, surgeon, and 1 or both eyes eligible using a secure web-based system. Postoperative assessments were masked to the allocated intervention. The primary outcome was unaided distance visual acuity (UDVA) in the study eye at 3 months. Secondary outcomes included corrected distance visual acuity, complications, and patient-reported outcomes measures. The noninferiority margin was 0.1 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR). ISRCTN.com registry, number ISRCTN77602616.
main outcome measuresWe enrolled 785 participants between May 2015 and September 2017 and randomly assigned 392 to FLACS and 393 to PCS. At 3 months postoperatively, mean UDVA difference between treatment arms was -0.01 logMAR (-0.05 to 0.03), and mean corrected distance visual acuity difference was -0.01 logMAR (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.05 to 0.02). Seventy-one percent of both FLACS and PCS cases were within ±0.5 diopters (D) of the refractive target, and 93% of FLACS and 92% of PCS cases were within ±1.0 D. There were 2 posterior capsule tears in the PCS arm and none in the FLACS arm. There were no significant differences between arms for any secondary outcome.
conclusionsFemtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery is not inferior to conventional PCS surgery 3 months after surgery. Both methods are as good in terms of vision, patient-reported health, and safety outcomes at 3 months. Longer-term outcomes of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness are awaited.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.