Bimanual Microincision versus Standard Coaxial Small-Incision Cataract Surgery: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Author:

Chen Chong1,Zhu Minjiao2,Sun Yong1,Qu Xinhua3,Xu Xun1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Fundus Disease, Shanghai First People's Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai - China

2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shanghai First People's Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai - China

3. Department of Orthopaedics, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Orthopaedic Implant, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai - China

Abstract

Purpose This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the outcomes of bimanual microincision cataract surgery (B-MICS) through a 1.2- to 1.5-mm incision versus standard coaxial small-incision cataract surgery (C-SICS) through a 2.8- to 3.2-mm incision. Methods A comprehensive literature search was performed according to the Cochrane Collaboration methodology to identify randomized controlled clinical trials comparing B-MICS with standard C-SICS. Main outcome measures were mean surgical time, mean phacoemulsification power, effective phacoemulsification time, best-corrected visual acuity, surgically induced astigmatism (SIA), mean laser flare photometry values, mean endothelial cell loss, mean increased central corneal thickness, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. Results We identified 14 randomized controlled clinical trials that included 1235 eyes diagnosed with cataracts. No statistically significant differences were detected between the 2 surgical procedures in terms of best-corrected visual acuity (p>0.05), SIA at postoperative 1 month (p = 0.09), laser flare photometry values (p = 0.38), mean endothelial cell loss (p = 0.53), increased central corneal thickness at postoperative 1 month (p = 0.64) or 3 months (p = 0.88), intraoperative complications (p = 0.68), and postoperative complications (p = 0.30); however, statistically significant differences were apparent for mean surgical time (p<0.00001), mean phacoemulsification power (p = 0.008), effective phacoemulsification time (p = 0.0009), SIA at postoperative 3 months (p = 0.02), and increased central corneal thickness at postoperative 1 day (p = 0.04). Conclusions The meta-analysis shows that the 2 techniques have similar outcomes in terms of final visual acuity and complications. Bimanual MICS has the advantage of less SIA and phaco time whereas C-SICS has the advantage of quicker surgery and less likelihood of early-onset corneal edema.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Ophthalmology,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3