ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
From Routine to Risk: Medical Liability and the Legal Implications of Cataract Surgery in the Age of Trivialization.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Gaze Characteristics Using a Three-Dimensional Heads-Up Display During Cataract Surgery.Journal of eye movement research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cataract surgery is the most common eye operation worldwide and is regarded as one of the safest procedures in medicine. Yet, despite its low complication rates, it generates a disproportionate share of litigation. The gap between excellent safety profiles and rising medico-legal claims is driven less by surgical outcomes than by patient expectations, often shaped by healthcare marketing and the promise of risk-free recovery. This narrative review explores the clinical and legal dimensions of cataract surgery, focusing on complications, perioperative risk factors, and medico-legal concepts of predictability and preventability. Particular emphasis is given to European frameworks, with the Italian Gelli-Bianco Law (Law No. 24/2017) providing a model of accountability that balances innovation and patient safety. Analysis shows that liability exposure spans all phases of surgery: preoperative (inadequate consent, poor documentation), intraoperative (posterior capsule rupture, zonular instability), and postoperative (endophthalmitis, poor follow-up). Practical strategies for risk reduction include advanced imaging such as macular OCT, rigorous adherence to updated guidelines, systematic video recording, and transparent perioperative communication. Patient-reported outcomes further highlight that satisfaction depends more on visual quality and dialogue than on spectacle independence. By translating legal principles into clinical strategies, this review offers surgeons actionable "surgical-legal pearls" to improve outcomes, strengthen patient trust, and reduce medico-legal vulnerability in high-volume cataract surgery.
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.