Impact of First Eye versus Second Eye Cataract Surgery on Visual Function and Quality of Life.

PURPOSE: To compare the impact of first eye versus second eye cataract surgery on visual function and quality of life. DESIGN: Cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 328 patients undergoing separate first eye and second eye phacoemulsification cataract surgeries at 5 veterans affairs centers in the United States. Patients with previous ocular surgery, postoperative endophthalmitis, postoperative retinal detachment, reoperation within 30 days, dementia, anxiety disorder, hearing difficulty, or history of drug abuse were excluded. METHODS: Patients received complete preoperative and postoperative ophthalmic examinations for first eye and second eye cataract surgeries. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was measured 30 to 90 days preoperatively and postoperatively. Patients completed the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ) 30 to 90 days preoperatively and postoperatively. The NEI-VFQ scores were calculated using a traditional subscale scoring algorithm and a Rasch-refined approach producing visual function and socioemotional subscale scores. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative NEI-VFQ scores and improvement in NEI-VFQ scores comparing first eye versus second eye cataract surgery. RESULTS: Mean age was 70.4 years (±9.6 standard deviation [SD]). Compared with second eyes, first eyes had worse mean preoperative BCVA (0.55 vs. 0.36 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), P < 0.001), greater mean BCVA improvement after surgery (-0.50 vs. -0.32 logMAR, P < 0.001), and slightly worse postoperative BCVA (0.06 vs. 0.03 logMAR, P = 0.039). Compared with first eye surgery, second eye surgery resulted in higher postoperative NEI-VFQ scores for nearly all traditional subscales (P < 0.001), visual function subscale (-3.85 vs. -2.91 logits, P < 0.001), and socioemotional subscale (-2.63 vs. -2.10 logits, P < 0.001). First eye surgery improved visual function scores more than second eye surgery (-2.99 vs. -2.67 logits, P = 0.021), but both first and second eye surgeries resulted in similar improvements in socioemotional scores (-1.62 vs. -1.51 logits, P = 0.255). CONCLUSIONS: Second eye cataract surgery improves visual function and quality of life well beyond levels achieved after first eye cataract surgery alone. For certain socioemotional aspects of quality of life, second eye cataract surgery results in comparable improvement to first eye cataract surgery.

Meniscal repair versus partial meniscectomy: a systematic review comparing reoperation rates and clinical outcomes.

PURPOSE: The aim of this investigation was to compare reoperation rates and clinical outcomes after meniscal repair and partial meniscectomy. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed to identify outcome studies of arthroscopic meniscal repair (inside-out, outside-in, and all-inside techniques) or partial meniscectomy in patients with traumatic meniscal tears. The studies included patients with no previous injuries or operations. RESULTS: At short- and long-term follow-up, partial meniscectomy had a lower reoperation rate (1.4% [2 of 143] and 3.9% [52 of 1,319], respectively) than isolated meniscal repair (16.5% [47 of 284] and 20.7% [30 of 145], respectively). There was a slightly higher reoperation rate after partial lateral meniscectomy compared with partial medial meniscectomy. Repairs of the medial meniscus resulted in higher reoperation rates than repairs of the lateral meniscus. Meniscal repairs at the time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction had a lower failure rate than isolated repairs. In the limited number of studies with long-term clinical outcome scores, meniscal repair was associated with higher Lysholm scores and less radiologic degeneration than partial meniscectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas meniscal repairs have a higher reoperation rate than partial meniscectomies, they are associated with better long-term outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.

Crowdsourced Assessment of Surgical Skill Proficiency in Cataract Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To test whether crowdsourced lay raters can accurately assess cataract surgical skills. DESIGN: Two-armed study: independent cross-sectional and longitudinal cohorts. SETTING: Washington University Department of Ophthalmology. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Sixteen cataract surgeons with varying experience levels submitted cataract surgery videos to be graded by 5 experts and 300+ crowdworkers masked to surgeon experience. Cross-sectional study: 50 videos from surgeons ranging from first-year resident to attending physician, pooled by years of training. Longitudinal study: 28 videos obtained at regular intervals as residents progressed through 180 cases. Surgical skill was graded using the modified Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill (mOSATS). Main outcome measures were overall technical performance, reliability indices, and correlation between expert and crowd mean scores. RESULTS: Experts demonstrated high interrater reliability and accurately predicted training level, establishing construct validity for the modified OSATS. Crowd scores were correlated with (r = 0.865, p < 0.0001) but consistently higher than expert scores for first, second, and third-year residents (p < 0.0001, paired t-test). Longer surgery duration negatively correlated with training level (r = -0.855, p < 0.0001) and expert score (r = -0.927, p < 0.0001). The longitudinal dataset reproduced cross-sectional study findings for crowd and expert comparisons. A regression equation transforming crowd score plus video length into expert score was derived from the cross-sectional dataset (r2 = 0.92) and demonstrated excellent predictive modeling when applied to the independent longitudinal dataset (r2 = 0.80). A group of student raters who had edited the cataract videos also graded them, producing scores that more closely approximated experts than the crowd. CONCLUSIONS: Crowdsourced rankings correlated with expert scores, but were not equivalent; crowd scores overestimated technical competency, especially for novice surgeons. A novel approach of adjusting crowd scores with surgery duration generated a more accurate predictive model for surgical skill. More studies are needed before crowdsourcing can be reliably used for assessing surgical proficiency.

Functional Visual Improvement After Cataract Surgery in Eyes With Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Results of the Ophthalmic Surgical Outcomes Data Project.

PURPOSE: To determine if cataract surgery on eyes with AMD confers as much functional visual improvement as surgery on eyes without retinal pathology. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of 4924 cataract surgeries from the Veterans Healthcare Administration Ophthalmic Surgical Outcomes Data Project (OSOD). We included cases of eyes with AMD that had both preoperative and postoperative NEI-VFQ-25 questionnaires submitted and compared their outcomes with controls without retinal pathology. We excluded patients with other retinal pathologies (740 patients). The analyses compared changes in visual acuity and overall functional visual improvement and its subscales using t-tests, multivariate logistic regressions, and linear regression modeling. RESULTS: Preoperative and postoperative questionnaires were submitted by 58.3% of AMD and 63.8% of no retinal pathology cases (controls). Analysis of overall score showed that cataract surgery on eyes with AMD led to increased visual function (13.8 ± 2.4 NEI-VFQ units, P < 0.0001); however, increases were significantly less when compared with controls (-6.4 ± 2.9 NEI-VFQ units, P < 0.0001). Preoperative best-corrected visual acuity (preBCVA) in AMD was predictive of postoperative visual function (r = -0.38, P < 0.0001). In controls, postoperative visual function was only weakly associated with preBCVA (r = -0.075, P = 0.0002). Patients with AMD with vision of 20/40 or better had overall outcomes similar to controls (-2.2 ± 4.7 NEI-VFQ units, P = 0.37). CONCLUSIONS: Cataract surgery on eyes with AMD offers an increase in functional visual improvement; however, the amount of benefit is associated with the eye's preBCVA. For eyes with preBCVA of 20/40 or greater, the improvement is similar to that of patients without retinal pathology. However, if preBCVA is less than 20/40, the amount of improvement was shown to be significantly less and decreased with decreasing preBCVA.