4.6 Article

The Royal College of Ophthalmologists' National Ophthalmology Database study of cataract surgery: report 1, visual outcomes and complications

Journal

EYE
Volume 29, Issue 4, Pages 552-560

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/eye.2015.3

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Special Trustees of Moorfield's Eye Hospital [ST1307A]
  2. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre based at Moorfields Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
  3. UCL Institute of Ophthalmology
  4. National Institute for Health Research [CL-2013-18-012] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims To describe the outcomes of cataract surgery in the United Kingdom. Methods Anonymised data on 180 114 eyes from 127 685 patients undergoing cataract surgery between August 2006 and November 2010 were collected prospectively from 28 sites. Outcome measures included intraoperative and postoperative complication rates, and preoperative and postoperative visual acuities. Results Median age at first eye surgery was 77.1 years, 36.9% cases had ocular co-pathology and 41.0% patients underwent cataract surgery on both eyes. Preoperative visual acuity was 0.30 logMAR or better in 32.0% first eyes and 47.7% second eyes. Postoperative best-measured visual acuity was 0.00 and 0.30 logMAR or better in 50.8 and 94.6% eyes without ocular co-pathology, and 32.5 and 79.9% in eyes with co-pathology. For eyes without co-pathology, postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity was 0.00 and 0.30 logMAR or better in 27.3 and 80.9% eyes. Posterior capsule rupture or vitreous loss or both occurred in 1.95% cases, and was associated with a 42 times higher risk of retinal detachment surgery within 3 months and an eight times higher risk of endophthalmitis. Conclusion These results provide updated data for the benchmarking cataract surgery. Visual outcomes, and the rate of posterior capsule rupture or vitreous loss or both appear stable over the past decade.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available