ReviewCureus2024
Cataract in HIV Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Digital versus manual workflows for cataract surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
HIV-induced AIDS attacks the immune system, leading to opportunistic infections. This syndrome has been linked to an increased risk of developing uveitis and subsequent cataracts. Consequently, cataract surgery may be associated with intra- and postoperative complications in HIV/AIDS patients. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the impact of cataract surgery on individuals with HIV. The primary outcome of interest was the incidence of postoperative complications, including uveitis, as well as an analysis of potential risk factors. We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases, identifying a total of 828 studies. Ultimately, four studies met our inclusion criteria. Of these, three studies exhibited a moderate risk of bias, while one study demonstrated a tendency toward a higher risk. Our analysis revealed that corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) improved after cataract surgery, with a mean difference (MD) of -0.55 (-0.97; -0.12). This was derived from a sample characterized by heterogeneity (I² = 88%, τ² = 0.1429), with a p-value <0.01. Patients with a history of HIV-related uveitis showed less improvement in CDVA, with an MD of -0.30 (-1.03; 0.43). Regardless of the presence of prior uveitis, complications such as cystoid macular edema (CME), posterior capsular opacification, and postoperative uveitis were reported following cataract surgery. The overall prevalence of postoperative uveitis was estimated at 7% (95% CI: 1-13%) based on a random effects model, with heterogeneity measured at I² = 34%. Cataract surgery in HIV-positive patients results in significant improvements in visual acuity, although the presence of preoperative HIV-related uveitis may affect these outcomes. Postoperative complications, such as CME and uveitis, are more prevalent in this population and require careful management.
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.