Evidence Hub

The corneal biomechanical changes of phacoemulsification in cataract patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

X.Q. Li, Xiaofeng Li, Xiaofeng Li, Xiaofeng Li, Lintong Tan, Chen Hu, Yuan Lai

PloS one, 2025

3 citations

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the corneal biomechanical properties of phacoemulsification in the treatment of cataract patients.

Methods: Pertinent studies were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and clinicaltrials.gov., as of November 05, 2024. The reference lists of related published reviews were included as well. This meta-analysis was performed with Stata Software and Review Manager, we used mean difference (MD) to evaluate the statistical consequence, using I2 statistic to assess the heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis were performed under the occurrences of high heterogeneity. We used eleven items to describe the characteristics of included studies, publication bias was performed with Egger's test. The quality assessment were evaluated with 3 items by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) items.

Results: Thirteen eligible studies were identified for data synthesis and assessment. According to the result of meta-analysis, the central corneal thickness(CCT) (MD = 10.50, 95% CI: [5.01, 15.98]; P<0.05) and intraocular pressure(IOPg)(MD = -0.73, 95% CI: [-1.26, -0.19]; P<0.05) of cataract patients after phacoemulsification was significantly higher than the control groups. The values of corneal hysteresis(CH) (MD = -0.43, 95% CI: [-0.62, -0.23]; P<0.05) and corneal resistance factor(CRF) (MD = -0.49, 95% CI: [-0.64, -0.33]; P<0.05) after phacoemulsification surgery were statistically lower than the control groups. While the values of IOPcc did not show statistically different (MD =…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free