Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36250089›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2022

Comparative anatomical outcomes of high-flow vs. low-flow phacoemulsification cataract surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Po-Chin Kuo, Jia-Horung Hung, Yu-Chen Su, Ching-Ju Fang, Chaw-Ning Lee, Yi-Hsun Huang, Shih-Chieh Shao, Edward Chia-Cheng Lai

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Quantitative assessment of ophthalmic viscosurgical device retention during phacoemulsification and aspiration: an ex vivo analysis.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Po-Chin KuoEducation Center, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Jia-Horung HungDepartment of Ophthalmology, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Yu-Chen SuDepartment of Ophthalmology, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Ching-Ju FangMedical Library, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Chaw-Ning LeeDepartment of Dermatology, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Yi-Hsun HuangDepartment of Ophthalmology, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Shih-Chieh ShaoSchool of Pharmacy, Institute of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Edward Chia-Cheng LaiSchool of Pharmacy, Institute of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Phacoemulsification is an effective and widely performed technique in cataract surgery, but the comparative anatomical outcomes, including endothelial cell loss (ECL), central corneal thickness (CCT), and central macular thickness (CMT), between high-flow and low-flow phacoemulsification cataract surgery remain unclear. Methods: This study followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement. Random-effects models were applied to measure pooled mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of anatomical outcomes between high-flow and low-flow phacoemulsification cataract surgery. We judged overall certainty of evidence (CoE) based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Results: We included six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) totaling 477 participants. The meta-analysis showed similar changes associated with these two surgery types in both ECL at postoperative days 2-14 (MD: -1.63%; 95% CI: -3.73 to 0.47%; CoE: very low), days 15-42 (MD: -0.65%; 95% CI -2.96 to 1.65%; CoE: very low) and day 43 to month 18 (MD: -0.35%; 95% CI: -1.48 to 0.78%; CoE: very low), and CCT at postoperative day 1 (MD: -16.37 μm; 95% CI: -56.91 to 24.17 μm; CoE: very low), days 2-14 (MD: -10.92 μm; 95% CI: -30.00 to 8.16 μm; CoE: very low) and days 15-42 (MD: -2.76 μm; 95% CI: -5.75 to 0.24 μm; CoE: low). By contrast, low-flow phacoemulsification showed less increase in CMT at postoperative days 15-42 (MD, -4.58 μm; 95% CI: -6.3 to -2.86 μm; CoE: low). Conclusions: We found similar anatomical outcomes, except in CMT, for both high-flow and low-flow phacoemulsification cataract surgery. Future head-to-head RCTs on visual outcomes should confirm our findings. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, identifier: CRD42022297036.

Indexed as

cataract surgerycentral corneal thicknesscentral macular thicknessendothelial cell lossfluidicsmeta-analysisphacoemulsificationsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36250089
PMCPMC9554630

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.