Immediate sequential bilateral surgery versus delayed sequential bilateral surgery for cataracts

Dickman, Mor M.; Spekreijse, Lindsay S; Winkens, Björn; Schouten, Jan S.A.G.; Simons, Rob W.P.; Dirksen, Carmen D.; Nuijts, Rudy M.M.A.

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013270.pub2

Cited by 16 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 93 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…11 Although these results do not significantly differ from ours, it is worth noting that the authors failed to analyze the odds for some of the most common surgical complications of cataract surgery (eg, PCR, CME, and corneal edema) in ISBCS and DSBCS eyes. 11 In addition, many recently published retrospective cohort studies were not included, and therefore, the results proposed by Dickman and colleagues are based on a significantly smaller sample size, an aspect which invariably affects the statistical power of the analysis. The authors did not observe any instances of bilateral endophthalmitis in the ISBCS group (37 cases analyzed in our study).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 80%

Immediate sequential vs. delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aiello

Afflitto

Leviste

et al. 2023

J Cataract Refract Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the safety and efficacy profile of immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS) compared with delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery (DSBCS). MEDLINE Ovid, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched. Outcome measures were postoperative visual acuity, postoperative spherical equivalent (refractive outcome), endophthalmitis, corneal edema, pseudophakic macular edema, and posterior capsule rupture (PCR). 13 articles met criteria for final inclusion. A total of 11 068 622 participants (18 802 043 eyes) were included. No statistically significant differences between ISBCS and DSBCS were identified in all the postoperative outcomes evaluated. However, a higher risk for PCR was identified in the ISBCS group from the pooled analysis of nonrandomized studies (risk ratio, 1.34, 95% CI, 1.08-1.67, P = .0081). In our view, the ISBCS approach has an acceptable safety-efficacy profile, comparable with DSBCS. Future investigations are warranted, with a focus on the analysis of risk factors for surgical complications, patient-reported outcome-measures, and cost effectiveness.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 80%

Immediate sequential vs. delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aiello

Afflitto

Leviste

et al. 2023

J Cataract Refract Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Cochrane review on ISBCS found moderate (one randomized controlled trial) and low-certainty (three nonrandomized studies) evidence that there was no difference in the percentage of eyes that did not achieve refraction within 1.0 D of target 1–3 months after surgery [ 27 ▪ ]. Furthermore, Owen et al [ 43 ] recently published a retrospective cohort study on visual outcomes of ISBCS and DSBCS using population-based data from the American Academy of Ophthalmology Intelligent Research in Sight (IRIS) Registry.…”

Section: Refractive Surprisementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Apart from endophthalmitis and refractive surprise, the risk of other complications (both intraoperative and postoperative) was found to not be significantly different for ISBCS compared with DSBCS in the current Cochrane review [ 27 ▪ ]. However, the certainty of the evidence was graded very low, and a high heterogeneity was found in the definition of complications between studies.…”

Section: Other Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The fear of endophthalmitis, most importantly a bilateral manifestation of the disease, has been identified as a predominant reason for not performing ISBCS [23–26]. Recently, a Cochrane review on immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery for bilateral age-related cataracts has been published [27 ▪ ]. This review showed that there is likely no significant difference in endophthalmitis rates between ISBCS and DSBCS.…”

Section: Endophthalmitismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Available studies that compare costs for ISBCS compared with DSBCS found lower costs in ISBCS [46–51] (Table 2). However, the Cochrane review showed there was a lack of cost-effectiveness studies on ISBCS versus DSBCS [27 ▪ ].…”

Section: Costs and Cost-effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

An update on immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery

Spekreijse

Nuijts

2022

Current Opinion in Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of reviewThe aim of this study was to present an overview of recent publications and opinions in the field of sameday bilateral cataract surgery. Recent findingsA Cochrane review was published comparing immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS) and delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery (DSBCS) with regard to safety outcomes, costs and costeffectiveness. In addition, several large database studies provided more information on incidences of rare complications such as unilateral and bilateral endophthalmitis rates. SummaryRecently available evidence showed that ISBCS is an effective and cost-effective alternative to DSBCS. Nonetheless, additional (randomized) registry studies, randomized controlled trials and cost-effectiveness studies are needed to evaluate bilateral endophthalmitis rates, refractive outcomes and cost-effectiveness of ISBCS compared with DSBCS.

show abstract