SynthesisBMC ophthalmology2026
Effect of anterior chamber air tamponade after phacoemulsification cataract surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC ophthalmology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the safety of anterior chamber air tamponade post-phacoemulsification on the cornea compared to balanced salt solution or Ringer's lactate filling, and summarize its potential influence on the aspects like the risk of postoperative endophthalmitis and Descemet's membrane detachment (DMD).
methodsThis meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.4 and included studies that evaluated post-phacoemulsification air tamponade compared with no air tamponade before October 2025. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. This review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251177446) and followed PRISMA guidelines.
resultsAmong seven included studies (1340 eyes), there were no significant between-group differences (mean difference [95% confidence interval]) at 1 month, with or without air tamponade, in the endothelial cell density (-103.59 [-256.86 to 49.68] cells/mm
conclusionsIntracameral air injection demonstrated comparable short-term corneal endothelial safety, with the potential added benefits of reduced inflammation and infection risk and of protection of the Descemet's membrane.
trial registrationPROSPERO, CRD420251177446. Registered 2025. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.