Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 4, 2026
Comparison of Agreement and Accuracy using Binocular Wavefront Optometer with Autorefractor and Phoropter
Published on: September 16, 2025
Comparing the Curative Effects between Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery and Conventional
Xinyi Chen1, Kailin Chen1, Jiliang He2
1Eye Center, Second Affiliated Hospital of School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Purpose:
To compare the outcomes of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) with those of conventional phacoemulsification surgery (CPS) for age-related cataracts.
Methods:
A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) and comparative cohort studies comparing FLACS with CPS. Endothelial cell loss percentage (ECL%), central corneal thickness (CCT), corrected and uncorrected distant visual acuity (CDVA and UDVA), and mean absolute error (MAE) of refraction were used as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included surgically induced astigmatism (SIA), mean effective phacoemulsification time (EPT), phacoemulsification power and circularity of the capsulorhexis.
Results:
Nine RCTs and fifteen cohort studies including 4,903 eyes (2,861 in the FLACS group and 2,072 in the CPS group) were identified. There were significant differences between the two groups in ECL% at one week, about one month and three months postoperatively, in CCT at one day, about one month postoperatively and at the final follow-up, in CDVA at one week postoperatively, and in UDVA at the final follow-up. Significant differences were also observed in MAE, EPT, phacoemulsification power, and the circularity of capsulorhexis. However, no significant differences were observed in CDVA at one week postoperatively or in surgically induced astigmatism.
Conclusions:
Compared to CPS, FLACS is a safer and more effective method for reducing endothelial cell loss and postoperative central corneal thickening as well as achieving better and faster visual rehabilitation and refractive outcomes. However, there is no difference in final CDVA and surgically induced astigmatism between the two groups.
