MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406141726 · doi:10.1159/000543353

Impact of Patient Characteristics and Surgery-Related Risk Factors on Endophthalmitis after Cataract surgery: A Meta-Analysis

2025· review· en· W4406141726 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shanshan Zhang, Jian Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmic Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndophthalmitisCataract surgeryPhacoemulsificationCataractsOdds ratioSurgeryIncidence (geometry)Diabetes mellitusGlaucomaRisk factorIntraocular lensComplicationOphthalmologyInternal medicineVisual acuity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Cataracts are the leading cause of blindness worldwide, with a notably high incidence rate. Endophthalmitis is the most severe complication following cataract surgery, often resulting in profound vision loss. This study evaluates the impact of risk factors such as age, sex, diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension, posterior capsule rupture (PCR), type of surgery, and use of intraocular lens (IOL) material on the risk of endophthalmitis after cataract surgery. METHODS: English and Chinese public databases were searched from inception to March 1, 2024. We included studies reporting the number of occurrences of endophthalmitis after cataract surgery on potential risk factors, including age, sex, DM status, hypertension status, intraoperative PCR, type of surgery and use of IOL material. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: A total of 57 studies were included and critically evaluated in the meta-analysis. The results showed that female sex was associated with a lower risk of endophthalmitis (odds ratio [OR]: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.75-0.87; p < 0.001). Individuals with diabetes who underwent cataract surgery were found to have a greater risk of endophthalmitis (I2 = 95%; OR: 4.90; 95% CI: 2.41, 9.95; p < 0.001), but the result may be influenced by publication bias. Individuals with hypertension (OR: 2.88; 95% CI: 1.53, 5.45; p = 0.001) and intraoperative PCR (OR: 9.18; 95% CI: 3.31, 25.43; p < 0.001) were found to have a greater risk of endophthalmitis. Phacoemulsification significantly reduced the risk of endophthalmitis compared with extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) (OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.45, 0.85) based on network meta-analysis. CONCLUSION: Male sex, hypertension, intraoperative PCR, and the use of the ECCE surgical approach are associated with a greater risk of postoperative endophthalmitis. Although an age-related trend in elevated risk was observed, this finding should be interpreted cautiously.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.061
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.178
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmic ResearchSame topicOcular Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207