Efficacy and safety of intracameral epinephrine as mydriatic agent in cataract surgery: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and cost implications of using epinephrine (Epi) as an additive in balanced salt solution (BSS) during cataract surgery, focusing on intraoperative pupil dilation, side effects, and cost considerations. Searches were conducted across multiple databases, including EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Web of Science, up to October 17, 2024. Eligibility criteria included studies assessing intracameral epinephrine for achieving or maintaining mydriasis, and reporting outcomes related to efficacy, adverse effects, intraoperative complications, and cost implications. Of the 476 articles screened, 23 met the inclusion criteria, involving 4262 cataract surgeries were included. Intracameral epinephrine consistently maintained pupil dilation, with reported average pupil sizes ranging from 6.9 mm to 7.2 mm, significantly reducing the need for additional mechanical dilation interventions (reported incidence <1% in some studies). Its use reduced the incidence of intraoperative floppy iris syndrome (IFIS) in high-risk patients. It minimized complications such as posterior capsular rupture and iris prolapse. Combination therapy with adjunctive agents like NSAIDs or lidocaine further improved dilation stability and reduced intraoperative miosis. Safety data revealed no significant impact on heart rate or blood pressure, demonstrating hemodynamic stability. Cost analyses highlighted savings from reduced surgical times (i.e., ∼13.5 min vs. ∼17.2 min with epinephrine alone) and decreased use of pupil expansion devices, resulting in estimated savings of over $19,000 in high-volume centers. Intracameral epinephrine effectively supports stable pupil dilation and reduces intraoperative complications in cataract surgery. It offers a safe and cost-effective alternative to traditional mydriatic agents, particularly when combined with adjunctive medications. However, given the considerable advancements in surgical techniques over time, caution should be exercised when interpreting findings from earlier studies. Additionally, the cost of epinephrine preparation, alongside its potential endothelial toxicity at higher concentrations, highlights the need for further research into the feasibility of using BSS without epinephrine in routine practice.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".