No abstract

IMPORTANCE Approximately 2 million cataract operations are performed annually in the US, and patterns of cataract surgery delivery are changing to meet the increasing demand. Therefore, a comparative analysis of visual acuity outcomes after immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS) vs delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery (DSBCS) is important for informing future best practices. OBJECTIVETo compare refractive outcomes of patients who underwent ISBCS, short-interval (1-14 days between operations) DSBCS (DSBCS-14), and long-interval (15-90 days) DSBCS (DSBCS-90) procedures. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective cohort study used population-based data from the American Academy of Ophthalmology Intelligent Research in Sight (IRIS) Registry. A total of 1 824 196 IRIS Registry participants with bilateral visual acuity measurements who underwent bilateral cataract surgery were assessed. EXPOSURES Participants were divided into 3 groups (DSBCS-90, DSBCS-14, and ISBCS groups) based on the timing of the second eye surgery. Univariable and multivariable linear regression models were used to analyze the refractive outcomes of the first and second surgery eye. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Mean postoperative uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) after cataract surgery. RESULTSThis study analyzed data from 1 824 196 patients undergoing bilateral cataract surgery (mean [SD] age for those <87 years, 70.03 [7.77]; 684 916 [37.5%] male). Compared with the DSBCS-90 group, after age, self-reported race, insurance status, history of age-related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, and glaucoma were controlled for, the UCVA of the first surgical eye was higher by 0.41 (95% CI, 0.36-0.45; P < .001) letters, and the BCVA was higher by 0.89 (95% CI, 0.86-0.92; P < .001) letters in the DSBCS-14 group, whereas in the ISBCS group, the UCVA was lower by 2.79 (95% CI, −2.95 to −2.63; P < .001) letters and the BCVA by 1.64 (95% CI, −1.74 to −1.53; P < .001) letters. Similarly, compared with the DSBCS-90 group for the second eye, in the DSBCS-14 group, the UCVA was higher by 0.79 (95% CI, 0.74-0.83; P < .001) letters and the BCVA by 0.48 (95% CI, 0.45-0.51; P < .001) letters, whereas in the ISBCS group, the UCVA was lower by −1.67 (95% CI, −1.83 to −1.51; P < .001) letters and the BCVA by −1.88 (95% CI, −1.98 to −1.78; P < .001) letters. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThe results of this cohort study of patients in the IRIS Registry suggest that compared with DSBCS-14 or DSBCS-90, ISBCS is associated with worse visual outcomes, which may or may not be clinically relevant, depending on patients' additional risk factors. Nonrandom surgery group assignment, confounding factors, and large sample size could account for the small but statistically significant differences noted. Further studies are warranted to determine whether these factors should be considered clinically relevant when counseling patients before cataract surgery.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

IMPORTANCE Big data studies may allow for the aggregation of patients with rare diseases such as uveitis to answer important clinical questions. Standardization of uveitis-related variables will be necessary, including the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes used to identify patients of interest. There are currently limited data on the uniformity of diagnosis mapping to ICD-10 codes for uveitis diagnoses among different health systems.OBJECTIVE To assess the degree of uniformity in mapping of uveitis clinical concepts to ICD-10 codes across health care systems using the same electronic health record (EHR) system. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis multicenter survey study was conducted between September 14 and October 9, 2020, at 5 academic health care systems that use the Epic EHR.

for the IRIS Registry Analytic Centers Study GroupPurpose: To evaluate whether cataract surgery is associated with decreased risks of central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) or branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO) development using the American Academy of Ophthalmology Intelligent Research in Sight (IRISÒ) Registry.Design: Retrospective database study of the IRIS Registry data.Participants: Patients in the IRIS Registry who underwent cataract surgery and 1:1 matched control participants from the IRIS Registry using a decision tree classifier as a propensity model.Methods: Control and treatment groups initially were selected using Current Procedural Terminology codes for uncomplicated cataract surgery and other straightforward criteria. To accomplish treatmentecontrol matching, a decision tree classifier was trained to classify patients as treatment versus control based on a set of chosen predictors for treatment, where best-corrected visual acuity and age were the most important predictors. Treatment and control participants subsequently were matched using the classifier, the visit dates, and the identifications of the practice. Cox regression was performed on the matched groups to measure the hazard ratio (HR) of retinal vein occlusion development adjusted for age, sex, race, primary insurance type, and previous diagnosis of diabetic retinopathy (DR), glaucoma, and narrow angles.Main Outcome Measure: The HR of retinal vein occlusion developing in patients who underwent cataract surgery compared with matched control participants.Results: The HRs for CRVO and BRVO developing in patients who underwent cataract surgery compared with matched control participants who did not during the first year after either cataract surgery or baseline visit were 1.26 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16e1.38; P < 0.001] and 1.27 [95% CI, 1.19e1.36; P < 0.001], respectively, after controlling for age, sex, race, insurance, and history of DR, glaucoma, and narrow angles. Diabetic retinopathy was the strongest predictor associated with CRVO (2.79 [95% CI, 2.43e3.20; P < 0.001]) and BRVO (2.35 [95% CI, 2.09e2.64; P < 0.001]) development after cataract surgery.

No abstract