Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42126536›Full record

ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2026

Machine learning for risk stratification of postoperative corneal edema in East Asian cataract patients: a model for precision ophthalmology.

Shuaixin Lu, Min Zhou, Xiaohua Zhang, Peiyao Huang, Simo Pan, Lingling Ba, Jie Wang, Xinmiao Zhou, Kai Wen, Jing Sun

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Shuaixin LuTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin Branch of National Clinical Research Center for Ocular Disease, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin, 300380, China.
Min ZhouTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin Branch of National Clinical Research Center for Ocular Disease, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin, 300380, China.
Xiaohua ZhangTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin Branch of National Clinical Research Center for Ocular Disease, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin, 300380, China.
Peiyao HuangTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin Branch of National Clinical Research Center for Ocular Disease, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin, 300380, China.
Simo PanTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin Branch of National Clinical Research Center for Ocular Disease, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin, 300380, China.
Lingling BaTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin Branch of National Clinical Research Center for Ocular Disease, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin, 300380, China.
Jie WangTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin Branch of National Clinical Research Center for Ocular Disease, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin, 300380, China.
Xinmiao ZhouTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin Branch of National Clinical Research Center for Ocular Disease, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin, 300380, China.
Kai WenTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin Branch of National Clinical Research Center for Ocular Disease, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin, 300380, China. wenkaitj@163.com.
Jing SunTianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases, Tianjin Branch of National Clinical Research Center for Ocular Disease, Eye Institute and School of Optometry, Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital, Tianjin, 300380, China. iiitcs@tmu.edu.cn.

Funding

Tianjin Binhai New Area Health Research Project Grant No.2023BWKQ019 and NO2023BWKZ007Tianjin Key Laboratory of Retinal Functions and Diseases Independent Projects No.2020TJSWWM002Tianjin Key Medical Discipline Construction Project TJYXZDXK-3-004A-2Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital High-level Innovative Talent Programme No.YDYYRCXM-E2023-04
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop and validate machine learning (ML) models for predicting early postoperative corneal edema (CE) after phacoemulsification in patients with normal preoperative corneal endothelium.

methodsA retrospective cohort study analyzed data from 1128 eyes undergoing uncomplicated phacoemulsification at Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital (May 2024-May 2025). CE was diagnosed on postoperative day 1 based on central corneal thickness increase > 50 μm, central stromal opacification, and blurred iris texture. Lasso regression preliminarily screened 26 clinical features to 9 key variables. Eleven ML models and a logistic regression model were developed. A hybrid Recursive Feature Elimination and Exhaustive Search strategy identified optimal feature subsets. Model performance is evaluated using metrics such as Area Under the Curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and Brier Score.

resultsKey predictors consistently identified included cumulative dissipated energy (CDE), age, and lens nucleus hardness. The optimized Support Vector Machine (SVM) model demonstrated superior performance during internal validation (AUC = 0.92, accuracy = 91.56%) and maintained strong generalizability on the independent test set (AUC = 0.89, accuracy = 84.50%). Other models like GradientBoost and PLS-DA also showed good performance post-optimization. The traditional LR model underperformed (optimized AUC = 0.81).

conclusionsML models, particularly SVM, effectively predict postoperative CE risk in cataract patients with normal corneal endothelium. CDE, age, and nucleus hardness are critical predictors. The SVM model provides a robust, preoperative tool for predicting individual risk of postoperative CE. By identifying high-risk patients, it has the potential to guide surgical technique selection, optimize patient counseling, and streamline postoperative care pathways, thereby enhancing overall surgical quality and patient satisfaction.

Indexed as

CataractCorneal edemaMachine learningPhacoemulsification

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.