Observational studyJournal of cataract and refractive surgery2026
Segmentation of patients with cataract according to their ocular biometry: the LAKE classification.
Observational study in Journal of cataract and refractive surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo create a classification for cataractous eyes based on their ocular biometry and thus provide a standard to stratify eyes when evaluating intraocular lens (IOL) formulas performance in different groups.
settingHigh-resolution cataract surgery unit.
designMonocentric, observational, retrospective study.
methodsData of 21 797 patients (both eyes explored) were acquired between 2016 and 2024. An exploratory analysis on the most relevant biometric variables determined the presence of uncommon eyes, justifying the need of a stratification. Eyes were classified in 27 subgroups based on axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth (ACD), and mean keratometry (Km). Subgroups were named with 3 letters corresponding to 3 levels-high (H), normal (N), or low (L)-for AL, ACD, and Km, respectively. Cutoffs were created on average ± SD. Linear mixed models were used to evaluate differences between groups, where α < 0.05 meant significant.
results43 954 eyes were classified, and all the subgroups contained at least 1 eye. The commonest subgroup was NNN (18 297 eyes, 41.97%), including eyes with (22.13 mm ≤ AL < 24.84 mm) AND (2.64 mm ≤ ACD < 3.43 mm) AND (42.50 diopters [D] ≤ Km < 45.60 D). Rarest subgroups were HLH and LHL (5 eyes and 1, respectively). Subgroups' characteristics (age, lens thickness [LT], LT/ACD, etc) reflect patterns seen frequently in clinical practice, for example, older patients with delayed surgeries, high LT and narrow ACD.
conclusionsThere is no consensus on how to subdivide eyes when evaluating IOL power formulas performance. LAKE classification addresses this need by providing a systematic method for categorizing cataractous eyes based on their biometry.
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.