Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Despite the refinement of modern cataract surgery, postoperative inflammation still constitutes a substantial amount of visual morbidity worldwide. A surrogate for intraocular inflammation and blood–aqueous barrier breakdown can be objectively quantified by Laser flare photometry (LFP). This review outlines the utility of LFP in assessing the assessment of post-cataract surgery inflammation. It highlights the impact of preoperative pathological states such as uveitis and diabetes, intraoperative techniques, including efficient phacoemulsification and direct comparisons between postoperative anti-inflammatory regimes. There is a large interobserver variation in the subjective flare measurement after cataract surgery and the continued use of LFP amongst other objective, noninvasive measurements of intraocular inflammation, particularly in the further development of cataract surgery, is recommended.

Keywords

cataract flare inflammation phacoemulsification

Introduction

Senile cataracts are the leading cause of visual impairment worldwide.¹ Cataract surgery is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures, with over 4.7 million operations performed across European Union member states in 2017² and over 400,000 carried out by the National Health Service in the United Kingdom alone.³ Surgical techniques have advanced dramatically over the last 60 years since the advent of modern small-incision phacoemulsification cataract extraction, first described by Kellman in 1967.⁴ Its high safety profile and excellent visual outcomes allow cataract surgery to treat glaucoma^5,6 and refractive errors using premium intraocular lenses (IOLs).⁷

Intraocular surgery causes a breakdown in the blood–aqueous barrier and leakage of inflammatory material to the anterior chamber (AC).⁸ Consequently, cataract surgery produces distinctive alterations in aqueous concentrations of proteins.⁹ Increased aqueous protein concentrations result in an aqueous humour haze called AC flare.⁸ This is assessed during slit lamp biomicroscopy and is the subject of various clinical grading systems,^10,11 the most popular of which is the Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN) grading system.¹² While this classification is widely accepted in quantifying AC inflammation to guide treatment, limitations include inherent subjectivity and marked interobserver variability, especially at low levels, primarily seen in clinical practice. It is, therefore, imperative to develop objective and noninvasive measurements of AC inflammation.

Laser flare photometry (LFP), described as early as 1988,¹³ has been commercialized since its emergence in 1989 and is currently marketed by KOWA (Kowa Company, Tokyo, Japan). It measures the level of scattered light from a laser beam directed through a measurement window at the AC¹⁴ (Figure 1). Successive models of laser flare meters (Kowa Co. Ltd, Tokyo, Japan) are differentiated by the laser medium (e.g. Helium-Neon 632.8 nm laser for FC-1000 and diode 670 nm for FM-500), the area of AC studied as well as the ability to quantify cell as well as flare. Published comparisons are rare but show reproducibility and comparability.¹⁵

Figure 1.

Schematic of laser flare photometry.

Measurements cannot be recorded in eyes with opaque media (e.g. corneal scarring) or in shallow ACs. Reliable measurements may also not be obtained in eyes with mature cataracts or extensive posterior synechiae due to increased background light scatter. LFP measurements are expressed in photons per millisecond (ph/ms), and the grading ranges from 3 to 1000 ph/ms.¹⁶ Because of its ability to be a more precise tool for aqueous flare quantification, LFP has been utilized in measuring postsurgical inflammation in ophthalmic surgical procedures such as trabeculectomy¹⁷ and pars plana vitrectomy,¹⁸ as well as laser procedures such as argon laser panretinal photocoagulation¹⁹ and laser capsulotomy.²⁰ Background flare (2.9–3.9 ph/ms between 20 and 40 years of age, increasing to 5.0–6.5 ph/ms between 70 and 80) is present in physiological eyes,^21,22 but is undetectable at the slit lamp. Studies have shown a high correlation between LFP values and protein concentrations in plasma and aqueous humour samples obtained in patients undergoing intraocular surgery.²³ LFP values also appear not to be significantly affected by mydriatic agents such as tropicamide and phenylephrine.²⁴ This review aims to identify and summarize the studies of LFP quantifying AC inflammation (via aqueous flare measurements) in the use of materials and surgical procedures used in cataract extraction as well as regimens to control postoperative inflammation.

Methods

We conducted a search using the following databases: PubMed (all years), the Web of Science (all years), Ovid MEDLINE (R) (1980–31 December 2021), Ovid MEDLINE (R) Daily Update 31 December 2021, MEDLINE and MEDLINE non-indexed items, Embase (1980–2021, week 52), Ovid MEDLINE (R) and Epub Ahead of Print, in-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily (1980–31 December 2021), CENTRAL (including Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; Cochrane Library: Issue 12 of 14 December 2021), metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (https://www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrial.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). Search terms included ‘aqueous flare’, ‘anterior chamber inflammation’, ‘tyndallometry’, ‘laser flare photometry’ combined with ‘cataract surgery’, ‘extra capsular’, ‘phacoemulsification’, ‘laser’ and ‘femtosecond’. Published articles in English were preferentially selected for consideration in the review. Articles selected for eligibility were screened and deemed eligible if the aqueous flare was measured with LFP both before and after cataract surgery. All the articles were screened by two authors (CW and AS) for eligibility in this narrative review. The data were collected in a spreadsheet (MicroSoft Excel, MicroSoft Corp, USA). The flare data in relation to the preoperative patient’s factors/comorbidities, intraoperative steps (incision, method of cataract removal, ophthalmic viscosurgical device, irrigating solutions and intraocular lenses) and postoperative regime for control of inflammation were collected.

Results

Articles from 1990 to June 2022 were accessed, identifying 155 articles for further analysis. Of these, 24 articles were excluded for the following reasons: 15 were duplicate studies, 1 did not involve cataract surgery and 8 measured flare using either clinical grading systems such as the SUN or an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay instead of LFP (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Flow diagram outlining eligible studies.

All studies showed an increase in flare after cataract surgery, which is at its highest and most variable in the immediate postoperative hours.²⁵ No study recorded flare with more than one model of flare meter, with the most popular meters used being the FC-1000, FM-500 and FM-600. The influence of pre-, intra- (including incision, nucleus dissassembly, ophthalmic viscosurgical devices, irrigating solutions and intraocular lenses) and postoperative variables are discussed below.

Preoperative

Patient factors and comorbidities are associated with the increased postoperative flare. Non-pathological states include older age²⁶ and pathological states include pseudoexfoliation syndrome,^27–29 chronic uveitis^17,30 and diabetes both with and without retinopathy.^31–34 The density of the nucleus, according to the LOCS III grading system, did not correlate with higher flare preoperatively.²⁶ However, it was associated with a higher postoperative flare,²⁶ possibly due to a higher phacoemulsification energy requirement.³⁴ Though iris colour does not affect preoperative values,^26,35 darker irises have a greater postoperative flare response at 2 weeks than lighter colours.³⁶

Intraoperative

Incision

The introduction of phacoemulsification techniques and foldable intraocular lenses in the early 1990s allowed for smaller primary incisions into the AC. This was shown in 1991 by Gills and Sanders to reduce flare as well as surgically induced astigmatism at postoperative day 1.³⁷ Though this is confounded by the different lenses that each group received, it is later discussed that foldable lenses do not adversely affect flare outcomes. The clear corneal incision is the preferred choice among cataract surgeons compared with scleral tunnels.³⁸ There is contrasting evidence regarding the impact of incision on postoperative flare; Dick et al.³⁹ found significantly lower flare in those who underwent clear corneal incisions in the first three postoperative days, but Kruger et al.⁴⁰ found similar flare levels at almost all time points to 90 days postoperatively. Nguyen et al.⁴¹ also found no postoperative difference between the incisions, however this was a secondary outcome measure No studies have found clear corneal incisions to worsen flare levels compared with scleral tunnels.

Nucleus disassembly

Phacoemulsification is the dominant method of nucleus disassembly in modern cataract surgery. Several studies comparing phacoemulsification with extracapsular surgery in the mid-1990s demonstrated that phacoemulsification resulted in a statistically significant reduction in peak flare values and a shorter postoperative recovery to normal flare values.^42–44 Kruger et al.⁴⁰ showed higher flare levels in patients subjected to longer phacoemulsification times (over 80 s) at postoperative week one. These differences had disappeared by 1 month. A similar influence of phacoemulsification time on postoperative flare was seen by Kaur et al.,⁴⁵ who found phacoemulsification time is affected by different femtosecond laser pretreatment patterns. Though the aim of phacoemulsification and irrigation/aspiration is to fully remove both nucleus and cortex, retained cataract fragments are often seen in the postoperative setting. Though retained fibres were not found to increase postoperative flare in a small study,⁴⁶ Nishi et al. found a prolonged postoperative flare in eyes with retained lens epithelial cells at days 6–14.

An observational study on femtosecond laser cataract surgery showed elevated flare levels for 1 month postoperative,⁴⁷ which returned to preoperative levels by 3 months. Comparative studies of flare measurements between femtosecond laser fragmentations of the lens compared to manual phacoemulsification shows mixed results. Femtosecond use was associated with a statistically significant decrease in flare at all time points up to 1 month by Abell et al.⁴⁸ and Chen et al.,⁴⁹ however it was not associated with a statistically significant difference in aqueous flare in a study of 110 patients by Pahlitzch et al.⁵⁰ or Favuzza et al.⁵¹ in their case series of 40 eyes undergoing femtosecond laser pretreatment. A matrix lens fragmentation pattern was associated with reduced postoperative flare values compared with a phacoemulsification ‘chop’ method. Proponents of femtosecond suggest that it can facilitate more efficient lens removal and less phacoemulsification time, which is known to decrease postoperative flare.⁴⁵ Femtosecond laser-assisted posterior capsulotomy at the end of surgery (to avoid posterior capsule opacification) did not increase flare compared to controls.⁵²

Ophthalmic viscosurgical devices

Ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs) are essential in modern cataract surgery in protecting structures, compartmentalizing key areas and maintaining pressure gradients.⁵³ Complete removal of OVD at the end of the case is important to avoid postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) spikes.⁵⁴ In the early 1990s, studies investigated flare in postoperative patients with retained OVD, assumed by the absence of the physiological ‘warm current’ detected at the slit lamp. It identified that those with loss of the warm current had higher flare levels for up to 1 week postoperatively compared to those with a normal warm current.^55,56 Use of the viscoadaptive OVD Healon 5 (Johnson & Johnson, New Jersey, USA) in cataract surgery was associated with lower flare values than the dispersive OVD Viscoat (Alcon laboratories, Fort Worth, Texas, USA) up to 8 h postoperatively.⁵⁷

Irrigating solutions and antibiotics

Irrigation solutions are used during phacoemulsification to facilitate cataract removal and maintain AC stability. Roberts found that adding the miotic carbachol at the end of surgery increased postoperative flare, probably due to a delayed re-establishment of the blood–aqueous barrier, while acetylcholine reduced flare compared to administration of a balanced salt solution control.⁵⁸ However, this was likely due to increased iris manipulation of the unconstructed pupil at the end of surgery. Kohnen et al.⁵⁹ also found the addition of heparin to the irrigation solution reduced postoperative flare on days 1 and 3, a difference that disappeared after 1 year. Unfortunately there are no studies that investigate the influence of intracameral antibiotic prophylaxis on aqueous flare as measured by LFP.

Intraocular lenses

LFP found similar flare rates across the previous generation of rigid poly (methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) IOLs inserted during extracapsular cataract extraction.⁶⁰ Modern IOL technology encounters materials that include silicone and acrylic with hydrophobic or hydrophilic properties. Foldable silicone and acrylic lenses which could be inserted through a smaller corneal incision than the rigid PMMA lens was not associated with a statistically significant difference in flare in patients with no medical history,^61–63 diabetes⁶⁴ and diabetic retinopathy.⁶⁵ Initially, it was thought that more postoperative flare was seen in hydrophobic than hydrophilic IOLs,⁶⁶ however the results of this short follow-up study (3 months) have not been replicated. No differences in postoperative flare have been seen among three different IOL models by Monnet et al.⁶⁷ and four types of foldable lenses from Schauersberger et al.⁶⁸ Similar flare values were seen in the 1CU (HumanOptics Ag, Erlangen, Germany) accommodative IOL.⁶⁹ Abela-Formanek et al.⁷⁰ studied six different IOLs in 2002 and found the hydrophobic acrylic AR40 lens (Allergan) to have statistically less flare than hydrophilic acrylic or hydrophobic silicone counterparts at 1 year postoperative. However, the authors could not identify an explanation for this. In addition, there were no correlations with other inflammatory parameters and these results were not replicated. There were no differences in postoperative flare in patients with uveitis who were given hydrophobic acrylic, hydrophilic acrylic or silicone IOLs.^70,71 Early evidence showed that IOLs with Heparin Surface Modification (HSM) were thought to reduce the inflammatory response, particularly in eyes at higher risk of postoperative inflammation such as uveitis.⁷² Indeed, HSM of hydrophobic IOLs was associated with less flare on postoperative day 1 in two studies,^73,74 but both of these results were not statistically significant in subsequent visits. By contrast, there were no differences in flare in patients with diabetes receiving a HSM PMMA IOL versus an uncoated hydrophobic acrylic IOL⁶⁴ or in patients with either diabetes and/or pseudoexfoliation syndrome receiving either a coated or uncoated IOL.⁷⁵ In 1997 Alió et al. investigated the flare associated with haptic placement post extracapsular cataract surgery. They found that on day 1, the highest flare was in the eyes with IOL implantation in the sulcus, and the lowest flare was when IOL implantation was in-the-bag implantation.⁶² In patients without capsular support, Cellini et al. found higher postoperative flare in scleral-fixated IOLs compared with iris fixation or control in-the-bag placement.⁷⁶ Amino and Yamakawa found that sulcus-to-sulcus fixation resulted in higher flare values than the sulcus-to-ciliary body or in-the-bag fixation.⁷⁷

Postoperative regimen

The postoperative regime after cataract surgery aims to minimize infection, inflammation and the development of pseudophakic cystoid macular edema (CME), which often impedes visual recovery.

Aqueous flare is often seen alongside CME as both result from a compromised blood–aqueous barrier.^78–81 Therefore, flare assessment is important to those investigating methods of reducing the incidence of postoperative CME. The major therapeutic classes are corticosteroids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), which have been shown either alone or combined to decrease postoperative flare compared with vehicle controls.^82,83 They are particularly important for patients at higher risk of postoperative inflammation, such as uveitis, pseudoexfoliation syndrome, or diabetes.⁸⁴ A summary of relevant studies is found in Table 1.

Table 1.

Selected studies comparing the effect of two different postoperative medications on post-cataract surgery aqueous flare. Comparisons are between the medication in question in the vertical rows and comparator medication in the columns. Upward arrows indicate an increase in flare compared to the comparator medication and downward arrows indicate a decrease. Sideways arrows indicate no statistically significant difference between the medications.

Medication	Comparator medication
	Effects on flare	Flurbiprofen 0.03% drop	Diclofenac 0.1% drop	Ketorolac 0.5% drop	Bromfenac 0.09% drop	Rimexolone 1% drop	Betamethasone 0.1% drop	Fluorometholone 0.1% drop	Subtenon dexamethasone	Dexamethasone 0.1% drop
	Indomethacin 0.1% drop	85, 86	87	88						89
	Diclofenac 0.1% drop	86, 90		91	92			93		29, 94
	Ketorolac 0.5% drop					95			96
	Nepafenac 0.1% drop		97, (combined with steroid)⁹⁸	99	99			100
	Dexamethasone 0.1% drop	101	102–104, 29, 94		105, 106			107
	Bromfenac 0.09% drop						108	109
							(compared to betamethasone then fluorometholone wean)¹¹⁰			106

Corticosteroids are well-known anti-inflammatory molecules and topical use has been a historical mainstay of ocular anti-inflammatories. Several steroid injections administered at the end of surgery do not appear to reduce flare compared with topical steroid controls, including subconjunctival betamethasone^111,112 or methylprednisolone¹¹³ and a single perioperative subtenon dose of triamcinolone (either 20 or 30 mg)¹¹⁴ in uncomplicated cataract surgery, subconjunctival dexamethasone in normal eyes and those with diabetes^115,116 or the intracameral dexamethasone delivery system IBI-10090 (Dexycu®, Massachusetts, USA).¹¹⁷ There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative flare between postoperative prednisolone 1% drops and a dexamethasone 0.1% gel (Dexagel®, Bausch & Lomb, Ireland).¹¹⁸ The AC dexamethasone delivery system Surodex® (Oculex, California, USA) did reduce postoperative flare compared with a 4-week course of dexamethasone eye drops in patients undergoing extracapsular extraction.^119,120

The side effects of steroids are well recognized,¹²¹ and LFP has allowed for investigating alternative NSAIDs in the postoperative period. As a sole treatment, Indomethacin appears to reduce flare over flurbiprofen^85,86 and when combined with prednisolone, reduces flare more than combination diclofenac and prednisolone for the first three postoperative days.⁸⁷ Indomethacin also appears non-inferior to ketorolac.⁸⁸ Diclofenac 0.1% is associated with less flare than flurbiprofen^86,90 or bromfenac⁹² and is similarly effective as ketorolac 0.5%.⁹¹ Ketorolac has an equivalent effect on flare as the now discontinued rimexolone.⁹⁵ Nepafenac 0.1% reduces aqueous flare more than ketorolac 0.4% and bromfenac 0.09% at the 4-week interval⁹⁹ and reduces flare more than diclofenac 0.1% when both are combined with steroids at days 15 and 30.⁹⁸ It appears comparable to preservative-free diclofenac 0.1% in diabetic and nondiabetic patients.⁹⁷ Twice daily bromfenac 0.09% does not improve postoperative flare compared to once daily dosing.¹²² Flare comparisons between topical corticosteroids and NSAIDs have yielded no statistically significant differences between the following: dexamethasone versus flurbiprofen,¹⁰¹ dexamethasone versus diclofenac,^102–104 dexamethasone versus bromfenac¹⁰⁵; bromfenac versus betamethasone¹⁰⁸ or bromfenac versus fluorometholone 0.1%¹⁰⁹; diclofenac versus 1% prednisolone,¹²³ fluorometholone/levofloxacin versus tobramycin/dexamethasone.¹⁰⁷ Erichsen et al. found no difference in postoperative flare between those taking combination prednisolone 1%/ketorolac 0.5% versus ketorolac 0.5% alone,⁹⁶ as did Ylinen et al. with diclofenac 0.1%/dexamethasone 0.1% versus diclofenac 0.1%.⁹⁷ Intraoperative administration of subtenon dexamethasone depot does not reduce flare as effectively as a topical regime of ketorolac 0.5% with or without prednisolone 1%.⁹⁶

Several NSAIDs have been shown to reduce flare more effectively than topical steroids. Bromfenac was shown to reduce flare more than a course of betamethasone followed by a fluorometholone wean in both patients with diabetes and their healthy controls; a difference was seen in the control arm at 2 weeks and the diabetes arm at 4 and 6 weeks.¹¹⁰ Nepafenac 0.1% appears to reduce flare more strongly than fluorometholone resulting in reduced fluorescein angiographic evidence of CME and hastened visual recovery.¹⁰⁰ Bromfenac 0.09% is associated with lower flare levels at 3 and 6 months postoperatively compared with dexamethasone 0.1%.¹⁰⁶ Diclofenac reduced postoperative flare compared to fluorometholone up to 8 weeks postoperatively.⁹³ It also reduces flare significantly compared to dexamethasone in both normal eyes and those with pseudoexfoliation.^29,94 By contrast, Zhang et al.⁸⁹ identified that dexamethasone reduced postoperative aqueous flare more than indomethacin. The intravitreal dexamethasone drug delivery system Ozurdex® (Allergan, Dublin, Ireland) reduced postoperative flare for weeks 1–4. However, the standard of care comparison group received no anti-inflammatory therapies.¹²⁴

Postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis are frequently used to reduce the risk of endophthalmitis. Though this is a well-studied area, the authors cannot find studies that investigate the influence of postoperative antibiotic medication on aqueous flare, nor are there comparisons between different postoperative antibiotic regimes that utilize LFP to assess anterior segment inflammation after cataract surgery. Some studies as described in this review investigate combination antibiotic/anti-inflammatory medication but no meaningful conclusions about the contribution of the antibiotic component can be drawn.

Ophthalmic solution preservatives contribute to conjunctival inflammation and disrupt the corneal epithelium, but these effects are primarily seen in their long-term use.¹²⁵ Hessemer et al.¹²⁶ found no statistically significant difference in aqueous flare between groups given preservative-free diclofenac 0.1% postoperatively compared to preserved diclofenac 0.1%. The addition of preservative-free diclofenac, when given both pre- and postoperatively, appeared to reduce flare compared to when given postoperatively alone. However, the study arms were limited to 30 patients only and follow-up extended to 7 days postoperatively. In patients with diabetic retinopathy, Yasuda et al.¹²⁷ found patients treated with preservative-free diclofenac postoperatively showed a faster return to preoperative flare values than preserved formulations.

Traditional Chinese and Sino-Japanese herbal remedies have shown statistically significant reductions in the postoperative flare on days 1, 3 and 5 with Orengedoku-to in uncomplicated eyes and Kakkon-to in both uncomplicated and uveitic eyes.^128,129 However, these results have since not been replicated, follow-up was limited to 7 days postoperatively and the control group in one of these studies received no therapies.¹²⁸ Topical miotics given postoperatively do not appear to affect flare.¹³⁰

Discussion

LFP is an established technology in assessing intraocular inflammation after cataract surgery. It identifies those at risk of postoperative inflammation, including older age and the presence of diabetes or uveitis. Ursell et al. showed that postoperative flare is also related to preoperative flare (p = 0.001, r² = 9.0%) as well as the preoperative colour of the cataract (p = 0.038, r² = 3.3%).²⁶ However, the properties of the cataract may falsely change the flare due to increased background light scatter.¹³¹ Cataract surgery technique influences postoperative flare and can be minimized with small incisions, efficient phacoemulsification and in-the-bag IOL placement. The majority of IOLs used today do not affect flare differently from one another. Finally, laser flare measurements are critical in the ongoing pursuit of the optimum postoperative anti-inflammatory regime. A recent phase III, multicentre, randomized trial has demonstrated the non-inferiority of a new topical antibiotic/anti-inflammatory agent levofloxacin 5 mg/mL + dexamethasone 1 mg/mL for 1 week in comparison to tobramycin 3 mg/mL + dexamethasone 1 mg/mL (Tobradex®, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, UK) for 2 weeks after cataract surgery but still relied on subjective aqueous flare measurements.¹³² Many other studies investigating topical medications postoperatively rely on the clinical grading of flare. These studies find little to no flare postoperatively but this is probably more due to the low sensitivity of the clinical grading system as opposed to representing a true absence of flare.^133,134

Levels of aqueous flare negatively correlate with visual function in other conditions such as uveitic macular edema¹³⁵ and retinitis pigmentosa.¹³⁶ Aqueous flare levels mostly seen after cataract surgery are unlikely to be of visual significance to most patients. However, as a marker of intraocular inflammation, flare is strongly associated with visually significant outcome measures such as cystoid macular edema.⁸¹ In patients with pseudophakic cystoid macular edema, LFP did not correlate with retinal thickness but did correlate significantly with reduced visual acuity.⁷⁹ LFP was analysed in 42% of 187 studies investigating both AC inflammation and macular changes after cataract surgery in a review by De Maria et al.⁸¹ It was found to correlate with the frequency of CME postoperatively better than other methods, including clinical grading and aqueous humour sampling. This is probably because of its superior ability to quantify the low levels of inflammation often seen after uncomplicated cataract surgery. Its routine use post-cataract surgery may help predict those at risk of inflammatory decompensation and allow treatment before significant morbidity occurs. Its validation as a sensitive, objective marker of postoperative inflammation has allowed for new associations with intraocular inflammation. For example, it is now shown that cases with raised LFP values at day 1 postoperative tended to also demonstrate increased flicker electroretinogram (ERG) responses at week 1.¹³⁷ Increased flare is also seen in eyes with anterior capsular contraction¹³⁸ and is interestingly detected in the fellow non-operated eye on day 1 postoperatively.¹³⁹

This review consists mainly of well-designed prospective, randomized studies with clear outcome measures and statistically significant results. However many studies did not include a flare measurement protocol. Pupillary dilatation prior to flare measurement may influence values^14,23,140 and it is unknown in many whether this was performed. Many followed a similar protocol to that of Ursell et al.²⁶ whereby seven dilated readings with <15% between background readings were taken, the two extreme values were discarded and the mean and standard deviation were taken from the remaining five. However, many studies included different approaches to background readings and extreme values before calculating mean and standard deviation and a number did not include a protocol at all. Methods for flare measurement must be included in each study and a standardized protocol in this area is welcome. Longer patient follow-up is also required, with very few studies having follow-up of greater than 12 months; despite evidence that aqueous flare in the eyes post-cataract surgery can persist for up to 36 months.¹⁴¹ Though the majority of research has been in the assessment of topical postoperative anti-inflammatory agents, little has been done to investigate the influence of antibiotic prophylaxis on anterior segment inflammation, either through intracameral antibiotics at the end of surgery or through postoperative drop regimes. Future studies should utilize LFP to measure the influence of cataract surgery antibiotics on blood–aqueous breakdown.

Conclusion

Despite its success, the worldwide frequency of cataract surgery creates substantial morbidity associated with blood–aqueous breakdown and inflammatory sequelae. The optimization of an already refined operation with modest postoperative changes cannot rely on clinical grading, which is qualitative and fraught with interobserver variability, particularly at the lower levels seen after an uncomplicated cataract surgery. In this review we highlight the influence of preoperative pathological states such as uveitis and diabetes where the blood–aqueous barrier is compromised prior to surgery. Various intraoperative strategies can minimize postoperative flare, including clear corneal incisions, efficient phacoemulsification and in-the-bag IOL placement. The optimum postoperative anti-inflammatory regimen is subject to ongoing study and care must be taken to include the influence of antibiotic prophylaxis. Aqueous flare is far from the only consideration in the assessment of cataract surgery strategies but it is only with objective and sensitive outcome measures of intraocular inflammation that the refinement of modern cataract surgery can continue.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

None.

Declarations

ORCID iD

Mayank A. Nanavaty

References

Lee

Afshari

NA.

The global state of cataract blindness. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2017; 28: 98–103.

Eurostat, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/ddn-20191204-1 (2019, accessed 6 January 2023).

NHS Digitial, https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/hospital-admitted-patient-care-activity/2019-20#highlights (2020, accessed 25 January 2023).

Kelman

CD.

Phaco-emulsification and aspiration. A new technique of cataract removal. A preliminary report. Am J Ophthalmol 1967; 64: 23–35.

Friedman

Vedula

SS.

Lens extraction for chronic angle-closure glaucoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; 3: CD005555.

Mansberger

Gordon

Jampel

, et al. Reduction in intraocular pressure after cataract extraction: the ocular hypertension treatment study. Ophthalmology 2012; 119: 1826–1831.

Wang

Stem

Oren

, et al. Patient-centered and visual quality outcomes of premium cataract surgery: a systematic review. Eur J Ophthalmol 2017; 27: 387–401.

Hogan

Kimura

Thygeson

Signs and symptoms of uveitis. I. Anterior uveitis. Am J Ophthalmol 1959; 47: 155–170.

Kondo

Yamauchi

Nakatsu

Effect of cataract surgery on aqueous turnover and blood-aqueous barrier. J Cataract Refract Surg 1995; 21: 706–709.

10.

Ben Ezra

Forrester

Nussenblatt

, et al. Uveitis scoring system. Berlin: Spriger Verlag, 1991, pp. 1–13.

11.

Schlaegel

Jr.

Essentials of uveitis. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1969, p. 27.

12.

Jabs

Nussenblatt

Rosenbaum

, et al. Standardization of uveitis nomenclature for reporting clinical data. Results of the first international workshop. Am J Ophthalmol 2005; 140: 509–516.

13.

Sawa

Tsurimaki

Tsuru

, et al. New quantitative method to determine protein concentration and cell number in aqueous in vivo. Jpn J Ophthalmol 1988; 32: 132–142.

14.

Tugal-Tutkun

Yalçındağ

Herbort

CP.

Laser flare photometry and its use in uveitis. Expert Rev Ophthalmol 2012; 7: 449–457.

15.

Nguyen

Martus

Küchle

[A clinical comparative study of tyndallometry using 2 laser flare meters]. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd 1996; 209: 89–93.

16.

Tugal-Tutkun

Herbort

CP.

Laser flare photometry: a noninvasive, objective, and quantitative method to measure intraocular inflammation. Int Ophthalmol 2010; 30: 453–464.

17.

Nguyen

Küchle

Martus

, et al. Quantification of blood–aqueous barrier breakdown after trabeculectomy: pseudoexfoliation versus primary open-angle glaucoma. J Glaucoma 1999; 8: 18–23.

18.

Agarwal

Joshi

Katoch

, et al. Application of laser flare photometry in the quantification of blood-aqueous barrier breakdown after micro-incision vitrectomy. Ocul Immunol Inflamm 2019; 27: 651–657.

19.

Moriarty

Spalton

Shilling

, et al. Breakdown of the blood-aqueous barrier after argon laser panretinal photocoagulation for proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Ophthalmology 1996; 103: 833–838.

20.

Altamirano

Mermoud

Pittet

, et al. Aqueous humor analysis after Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy with the laser flare-cell meter. J Cataract Refract Surg 1992; 18: 554–558.

21.

Onodera

Gimbel

DeBroff

BM.

Aqueous flare and cell number in healthy eyes of Caucasians. Jpn J Ophthalmol 1993; 37: 445–451.

22.

Guillén-Monterrubío

Hartikainen

Taskinen

, et al. Quantitative determination of aqueous flare and cells in healthy eyes. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1997; 75: 58–62.

23.

Shah

Spalton

Smith

SE.

Measurement of aqueous cells and flare in normal eyes. Br J Ophthalmol 1991; 75: 348–352.

24.

Chin

Cuzzani

Gimbel

, et al. Effect of commercial dilating agents on laser flare-cell measurements. Can J Ophthalmol 1996; 31: 362–365.

25.

Findl

Amon

Petternel

, et al. Early objective assessment of intraocular inflammation after phacoemulsification cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2003; 29: 2143–2147.

26.

Ursell

Spalton

Tilling

Relation between postoperative blood-aqueous barrier damage and LOCS III cataract gradings following routine phacoemulsification surgery. Br J Ophthalmol 1997; 81: 544–547.

27.

Schumacher

Nguyen

Küchle

, et al. Quantification of aqueous flare after phacoemulsification with intraocular lens implantation in eyes with pseudoexfoliation syndrome. Arch Ophthalmol 1999; 117: 733–735.

28.

Shastri

Vasavada

Phacoemulsification in Indian eyes with pseudoexfoliation syndrome. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001; 27: 1629–1637.

29.

Ilveskoski

Taipale

Holmström

, et al. Macular edema after cataract surgery in eyes with and without pseudoexfoliation syndrome. Eur J Ophthalmol 2019; 29: 504–509.

30.

Takeda

Hasegawa

Notomi

, et al. Surgical outcomes of contrast sensitivity and visual acuity in uveitis-associated cataract. Clin Ophthalmol 2021; 15: 2665–2673.

31.

Liu

Luo

, et al. Disorders of the blood-aqueous barrier after phacoemulsification in diabetic patients. Eye 2004; 18: 900–904.

32.

Takamura

Tomomatsu

Arimura

, et al. Anterior capsule contraction and flare intensity in the early stages after cataract surgery in eyes with diabetic retinopathy. J Cataract Refract Surg 2013; 39: 716–721.

33.

Zaczek

Zetterström

Aqueous flare intensity after phacoemulsification in patients with diabetes mellitus. J Cataract Refract Surg 1998; 24: 1099–1104.

34.

Ikegami

Takahashi

Amino

Evaluation of choroidal thickness, macular thickness, and aqueous flare after cataract surgery in patients with and without diabetes: a prospective randomized study. BMC Ophthalmol 2020; 20: 102.

35.

Kruger

Schauersberger

Abela-Formanek

, et al. [Effect of duration of phacoemulsification on postoperative inflammation–a retrospective study]. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd 2001; 218: 204–208.

36.

Onodera

Gimbel

DeBroff

BM.

Effects of cycloplegia and iris pigmentation on postoperative intraocular inflammation. Ophthalmic Surg 1993; 24: 746–752.

37.

Gills

Sanders

DR.

Use of small incisions to control induced astigmatism and inflammation following cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 1991; 17: 740–744.

38.

Leaming

DV.

Practice styles and preferences of ASCRS members–2003 survey. J Cataract Refract Surg 2004; 30: 892–900.

39.

Dick

Schwenn

Krummenauer

, et al. Inflammation after sclerocorneal versus clear corneal tunnel phacoemulsification. Ophthalmology 2000; 107: 241–247.

40.

Kruger

Schauersberger

Findl

, et al. Postoperative inflammation after clear corneal and sclerocorneal incisions. J Cataract Refract Surg 1998; 24: 524–528.

41.

Nguyen

Tomida

Kuchle

[Blood-aqueous barrier after phacoemulsification with posterior chamber lens implantation; foldable acrylate lens vs PMMA lens– a clinical study on 46 eyes]. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd 2000; 217: 215–218.

42.

Pande

Spalton

Kerr-Muir

, et al. Postoperative inflammatory response to phacoemulsification and extracapsular cataract surgery: aqueous flare and cells. J Cataract Refract Surg 1996; 22: 770–774.

43.

Laurell

Zetterström

Philipson

, et al. Randomized study of the blood-aqueous barrier reaction after phacoemulsification and extracapsular cataract extraction. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1998; 76: 573–578.

44.

Chee

Sivakumar

, et al. Postoperative inflammation: extracapsular cataract extraction versus phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg 1999; 25: 1280–1285.

45.

Kaur

Titiyal

Surve

, et al. Effect of lens fragmentation patterns on phacoemulsification parameters and postoperative inflammation in femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery. Curr Eye Res 2018; 43: 1228–1232.

46.

Nishi

Disruption of the blood-aqueous barrier by residual lens epithelial cells after intraocular lens implantation. Ophthalmic Surg 1992; 23: 325–329.

47.

Mariacher

Ebner

Seuthe

, et al. Femtosecond laser–assisted cataract surgery: first clinical results with special regard to central corneal thickness, endothelial cell count, and aqueous flare levels. J Cataract Refract Surg 2016; 42: 1151–1156.

48.

Abell

Allen

Vote

BJ.

Anterior chamber flare after femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2013; 39: 1321–1326.

49.

Chen

Lin

Zheng

, et al. Expression of cytokines, chmokines and growth factors in patients undergoing cataract surgery with Femtosecond Laser Pretreatment. PLoS One 2015; 10(9): e0137227.

50.

Pahlitzsch

Torun

Pahlitzsch

, et al. Impact of the femtosecond laser in line with the femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) on the anterior chamber characteristics in comparison to the manual phacoemulsification. Semin Ophthalmol 2017; 32: 456–461.

51.

Favuzza

Becatti

Gori

, et al. Cytokines, chemokines, and flare in the anterior chamber after femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2019; 45: 910–914.

52.

Schojai

Schultz

Haeussler-Sinangin

, et al. Safety of femtosecond laser-assisted primary posterior capsulotomy immediately after cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2017; 43: 1171–1176.

53.

Malvankar-Mehta

Subramanian

, et al. Impact of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices in cataract surgery. J Ophthalmol 2020; 2020: 7801093.

54.

Tognetto

Cecchini

Ravalico

Survey of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2004; 15: 29–32.

55.

Tsurimaki

Shimizu

Effects of residual sodium hyaluronate on postsurgical blood-aqueous barrier. Jpn J Ophthalmol 1991; 35: 446–452.

56.

Tsurimaki

Shimizu

[The effect of viscoelastic substances on postsurgical blood aqueous barrier]. Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi 1991; 95: 570–574.

57.

Schwenn

Dick

Krummenauer

, et al. Healon5 versus Viscoat during cataract surgery: intraocular pressure, laser flare and corneal changes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2000; 238: 861–867.

58.

Roberts

CW.

Intraocular miotics and postoperative inflammation. J Cataract Refract Surg 1993; 19: 731–734.

59.

Kohnen

Dick

Hessemer

, et al. Effect of heparin in irrigating solution on inflammation following small incision cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 1998; 24: 237–243.

60.

Alió

Sayans

Chipont

Laser flare-cell measurement of inflammation after uneventful extracapsular cataract extraction and intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 1996; 22: 775–779.

61.

Krepler

Ries

Derbolav

, et al. Inflammation after phacoemulsification in diabetic retinopathy. Foldable acrylic versus heparin-surface-modified poly(methyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001; 27: 233–238.

62.

Alió

Sayans

Chipont

Flare-cell meter measurement of inflammation after uneventful cataract surgery with intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 1997; 23: 935–939.

63.

Martin

Sanders

Van Der Karr

, et al. Effect of small incision intraocular lens surgery on postoperative inflammation and astigmatism. J Cataract Refract Surg 1992; 18: 51–57.

64.

Gatinel

Lebrun

Le Toumelin

, et al. Aqueous flare induced by heparin-surface-modified poly(methyl methacrylate) and acrylic lenses implanted through the same-size incision in patients with diabetes. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001; 27: 855–860.

65.

Oshika

Suzuki

Kizaki

, et al. Two year clinical study of a soft acrylic intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 1996; 22: 104–109.

66.

Miyake

Ota

Miyake

, et al. Correlation between intraocular lens hydrophilicity and anterior capsule opacification and aqueous flare. J Cataract Refract Surg 1996; 22(Suppl. 1): 764–769.

67.

Monnet

Tépenier

Brézin

AP.

Objective assessment of inflammation after cataract surgery: comparison of 3 similar intraocular lens models. J Cataract Refract Surg 2009; 35: 677–681.

68.

Schauersberger

Kruger

Abela

, et al. Course of postoperative inflammation after implantation of 4 types of foldable intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 1999; 25: 1116–1120.

69.

Nguyen

Langenbucher

Huber

, et al. Short-term blood-aqueous barrier breakdown after implantation of the 1CU accommodative posterior chamber intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28: 1189–1194.

70.

Abela-Formanek

Amon

Schild

, et al. Uveal and capsular biocompatibility of hydrophilic acrylic, hydrophobic acrylic, and silicone intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28: 50–61.

71.

Abela-Formanek

Amon

Kahraman

, et al. Biocompatibility of hydrophilic acrylic, hydrophobic acrylic, and silicone intraocular lenses in eyes with uveitis having cataract surgery: long-term follow-up. J Cataract Refract Surg 2011; 37: 104–112.

72.

Tran

Guex-Crosier

Herbort

CP.

Effect of cataract surgery with intraocular lens implantation on inflammation in chronic uveitis: a longitudinal laser flare photometry study. Can J Ophthalmol 1998; 33: 264–269.

73.

Krall

Arlt

Jell

, et al. Intraindividual aqueous flare comparison after implantation of hydrophobic intraocular lenses with or without a heparin-coated surface. J Cataract Refract Surg 2014; 40: 1363–1370.

74.

Shah

Spalton

DJ.

Comparison of the postoperative inflammatory response in the normal eye with heparin-surface-modified and poly(methyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 1995; 21: 579–585.

75.

Maedel

Hirnschall

Chen

, et al. Effect of heparin coating of a foldable intraocular lens on inflammation and capsular bag performance after cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2013; 39: 1810–1817.

76.

Cellini

Strobbe

Toschi

, et al. Secondary IOL implantation without capsular support: a laser flare cell meter study. ISRN Ophthalmol 2011; 2011: 653246.

77.

Amino

Yamakawa

Long-term results of out-of-the-bag intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 2000; 26: 266–270.

78.

Ursell

Spalton

Whitcup

, et al. Cystoid macular edema after phacoemulsification: relationship to blood-aqueous barrier damage and visual acuity. J Cataract Refract Surg 1999; 25: 1492–1497.

79.

Ersoy

Caramoy

Ristau

, et al. Aqueous flare is increased in patients with clinically significant cystoid macular oedema after cataract surgery. Br J Ophthalmol 2013; 97: 862–865.

80.

Aaronson

Taipale

Achiron

, et al. Relationship between prolonged intraocular inflammation and macular edema after cataract surgery. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2021; 10: 15.

81.

De Maria

Coassin

Iannetta

, et al. Laser flare and cell photometry to measure inflammation after cataract surgery: a tool to predict the risk of cystoid macular edema. Int Ophthalmol 2021; 41: 2293–2300.

82.

Blaydes

Kelley

Walt

, et al. Flurbiprofen 0.03% for the control of inflammation following cataract extraction by phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg 1993; 19: 481–487.

83.

Lorenz

Dick

Jehkul

, et al. Inflammatory response after phacoemulsification treated with 0.5% prednisolone acetate or vehicle. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2008; 246: 1617–1622.

84.

Coassin

Iovieno

Soldani

, et al. Bromfenac ophthalmic solution 0.09% as an adjunctive therapy to topical steroids after cataract surgery in pseudoexfoliation syndrome. J Cataract Refract Surg 2016; 42: 1119–1125.

85.

Strobel

Seitz

Tietze

[Quantitative studies of protein and cell concentrations in the anterior chamber in cataract surgery with therapy using steroidal and non-steroidal antiphlogistic drugs]. Ophthalmologica 1991; 202: 86–93.

86.

Diestelhorst

Schmidl

Konen

, et al. Efficacy and tolerance of diclofenac sodium 0.1%, flurbiprofen 0.03%, and indomethacin 1.0% in controlling postoperative inflammation. J Cataract Refract Surg 1996; 22(Suppl. 1): 788–793.

87.

Hessemer

Schmitt

. [Anti-inflammatory effect of a local combination therapy with diclofenac and prednisolone vs. indomethacin and prednisolone. A laser flare cell photometry study]. Ophthalmologe 1994; 91: 224–228.

88.

Weber

Kodjikian

Kruse

, et al. Efficacy and safety of indomethacin 0.1% eye drops compared with ketorolac 0.5% eye drops in the management of ocular inflammation after cataract surgery. Acta Ophthalmol 2013; 91: e15–e21.

89.

Zhang

Liu

Yang

, et al. The role of dexamethasone in clinical pharmaceutical treatment for patients with cataract surgery. Exp Ther Med 2018; 15: 2177–2181.

90.

Schmidl

Mester

Diestelhorst

, et al. [Laser flare measurement with 3 different nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs after phacoemulsification with posterior chamber lens implantation]. Ophthalmologe 1997; 94: 33–37.

91.

Flach

Dolan

Donahue

, et al. Comparative effects of ketorolac 0.5% or diclofenac 0.1% ophthalmic solutions on inflammation after cataract surgery. Ophthalmology 1998; 105: 1775–1779.

92.

Giannaccare

Finzi

Sebastiani

, et al. The comparative efficacy and tolerability of diclofenac 0.1% and bromfenac 0.09% ophthalmic solutions after cataract surgery. Curr Eye Res 2018; 43: 1445–1453.

93.

Miyake

Masuda

Shirato

, et al. Comparison of diclofenac and fluorometholone in preventing cystoid macular edema after small incision cataract surgery: a multicentered prospective trial. Jpn J Ophthalmol 2000; 44: 58–67.

94.

Ylinen

Holmström

Laine

, et al. Anti-inflammatory medication following cataract surgery: a randomized trial between preservative-free dexamethasone, diclofenac and their combination. Acta Ophthalmol 2018; 96: 486–493.

95.

Solomon

Vroman

Barker

, et al. Comparison of ketorolac tromethamine 0.5% and rimexolone 1% to control inflammation after cataract extraction. Prospective randomized double-masked study. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001; 27: 1232–1237.

96.

Erichsen

Forman

Holm

, et al. Effect of anti-inflammatory regimen on early postoperative inflammation after cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2021; 47: 323–330.

97.

Ylinen

Taipale

Lindholm

, et al. Postoperative management in cataract surgery: nepafenac and preservative-free diclofenac compared. Acta Ophthalmol 2018; 96: 853–859.

98.

Cagini

Pellegrino

Cerquaglia

, et al. Comparison of the effect of diclofenac 0.1% and nepafenac 0.1% on aqueous flare in patients undergoing cataract surgery: a prospective randomized study. Curr Eye Res 2020; 45: 1089–1093.

99.

Sahu

Ram

Bansal

, et al. Effect of topical ketorolac 0.4%, nepafenac 0.1%, and bromfenac 0.09% on postoperative inflammation using laser flare photometry in patients having phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg 2015; 41: 2043–2048.

100.

Miyake

Ota

Miyake

, et al. Nepafenac 0.1% versus fluorometholone 0.1% for preventing cystoid macular edema after cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2011; 37: 1581–1588.

101.

Drews

RC.

Management of postoperative inflammation: dexamethasone versus flurbiprofen, a quantitative study using the new flare cell meter. Ophthalmic Surg 1990; 21: 560–562.

102.

Othenin-Girard

Tritten

Pittet

, et al. Dexamethasone versus diclofenac sodium eyedrops to treat inflammation after cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 1994; 20: 9–12.

103.

Roberts

Brennan

KM.

A comparison of topical diclofenac with prednisolone for postcataract inflammation. Arch Ophthalmol 1995; 113: 725–727.

104.

Laurell

Zetterström

Effects of dexamethasone, diclofenac, or placebo on the inflammatory response after cataract surgery. Br J Ophthalmol 2002; 86: 1380–1384.

105.

Coassin

De Maria

Mastrofilippo

, et al. Anterior chamber inflammation after cataract surgery: a randomized clinical trial comparing bromfenac 0.09% to dexamethasone 0.1. Adv Ther 2019; 36: 2712–2722.

106.

De Maria

Coassin

Mastrofilippo

, et al. Persistence of inflammation after uncomplicated cataract surgery: a 6-month laser flare photometry analysis. Adv Ther 2020; 37: 3223–3233.

107.

Chen

Han

Zhu

, et al. Comparison of the anti-inflammatory effects of fluorometholone 0.1% combined with levofloxacin 0.5% and tobramycin/dexamethasone eye drops after cataract surgery. Int J Ophthalmol 2016; 9: 1619–1623.

108.

Miyanaga

Miyai

Nejima

, et al. Effect of bromfenac ophthalmic solution on ocular inflammation following cataract surgery. Acta Ophthalmol 2009; 87: 300–305.

109.

Nishino

Eguchi

Iwata

, et al. Are topical steroids essential after an uneventful cataract surgery? J Med Invest 2009; 56: 11–15.

110.

Endo

Kato

Haruyama

, et al. Efficacy of bromfenac sodium ophthalmic solution in preventing cystoid macular oedema after cataract surgery in patients with diabetes. Acta Ophthalmol 2010; 88: 896–900.

111.

Shah

McHugh

Spalton

DJ.

The effects of subconjunctival betamethasone on the blood aqueous barrier following cataract surgery: a double-blind randomised prospective study. Br J Ophthalmol 1992; 76: 475–478.

112.

Dieleman

Wubbels

van Kooten-Noordzij

, et al. Single perioperative subconjunctival steroid depot versus postoperative steroid eyedrops to prevent intraocular inflammation and macular edema after cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2011; 37: 1589–1597.

113.

Nicolás

Benítez del Castillo

Díaz

, et al. Effects of subconjunctival methylprednisolone on the blood aqueous barrier following cataract surgery. Int Ophthalmol 1995–1996; 19: 235–238.

114.

Negi

Browning

Vernon

SA.

Single perioperative triamcinolone injection versus standard postoperative steroid drops after uneventful phacoemulsification surgery: randomized controlled trial. J Cataract Refract Surg 2006; 32: 468–474.

115.

Schmitt

Hessemer

[Is subconjunctival steroid administration in addition to local therapy after cataract operations necessary? a laser tyndallometric study]. Ophthalmologe 1995; 92: 303–306.

116.

Fukushima

Kato

Kaiya

, et al. Effect of subconjunctival steroid injection on intraocular inflammation and blood glucose level after cataract surgery in diabetic patients. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001; 27: 1386–1391.

117.

Donnenfeld

Solomon

Matossian

Safety of IBI-10090 for inflammation associated with cataract surgery: phase 3 multicenter study. J Cataract Refract Surg 2018; 44: 1236–1246.

118.

Struck

Bariszlovich

Comparison of 0.1% dexamethasone phosphate eye gel (Dexagel) and 1% prednisolone acetate eye suspension in the treatment of post-operative inflammation after cataract surgery. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2001; 239: 737–742.

119.

Tan

Chee

Lim

, et al. Randomized clinical trial of a new dexamethasone delivery system (Surodex) for treatment of post-cataract surgery inflammation. Ophthalmology 1999; 106: 223–231.

120.

Tan

Chee

Lim

, et al. Randomized clinical trial of Surodex steroid drug delivery system for cataract surgery: anterior versus posterior placement of two Surodex in the eye. Ophthalmology 2001; 108: 2172–2181.

121.

Dinning

WJ.

Steroids and the eye–indications and complications. Postgrad Med J 1976; 52: 634–638.

122.

Titiyal

Thangavel

Kaur

, et al. Comparative evaluation of once-daily and twice-daily dosing of topical bromfenac 0.09%: aqueous pharmacokinetics and clinical efficacy study. J Cataract Refract Surg 2021; 47: 1115–1121.

123.

Brennan

Brown

Roberts

CW.

A comparison of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs to steroids for control of post cataract inflammation. Insight 1993; 18: 8–9, 11.

124.

Gupta

Ram

Kumar

, et al. Effect of sustained-release long-acting intravitreal dexamethasone implant in patients of non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy undergoing phacoemulsification: a randomized controlled trial. Indian J Ophthalmol 2021; 69: 3263–3272.

125.

Baudouin

Labbé

Liang

, et al. Preservatives in eyedrops: the good, the bad and the ugly. Prog Retin Eye Res 2010; 29: 312–334.

126.

Hessemer

Schmidt

Schartner

[Minimally inflammatory cataract surgery]. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd 1996; 209: 331–339.

127.

Yasuda

Miyazawa

Shimura

A comparison of preservative-free diclofenac and preserved diclofenac eye drops after cataract surgery in patients with diabetic retinopathy. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2012; 28: 283–289.

128.

Ikeda

Hayasaka

Nagaki

, et al. Effects of traditional Sino-Japanese herbal medicines on aqueous flare elevation after small-incision cataract surgery. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2001; 17: 59–65.

129.

Ikeda

Hayasaka

Nagaki

, et al. Effects of kakkon-to and sairei-to on aqueous flare elevation after complicated cataract surgery. Am J Chin Med 2002; 30: 347–353.

130.

Tomida

Martus

Küchle

[Influence of postoperative topical application of miotics after cataract extraction on intraocular pressure and the blood-aqueous barrier]. Ophthalmologe 1999; 96: 583–586.

131.

Hasanreisoglu

Kesim

Yalinbas

, et al. Effect of light backscattering from anterior segment structures on automated flare meter measurements. Eur J Ophthalmol 2022; 32: 2291–2297.

132.

Bandello

Coassin

Di Zazzo

, et al. Correction: one week of levofloxacin plus dexamethasone eye drops for cataract surgery: an innovative and rational therapeutic strategy. Eye (London, England) 2020; 34: 2150–2122.

133.

Kim

Koh

, et al. Comparison of a preservative-free nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug and preservative-free corticosteroid after uneventful cataract surgery: multicenter, randomized, evaluator-blinded clinical trial. J Cataract Refract Surg 2022; 48: 710–716.

134.

Kuriakose

Cho

Nassiri

, et al. Comparative outcomes of standard perioperative eye drops, intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide-moxifloxacin, and intracameral dexamethasone-moxifloxacin-ketorolac in cataract surgery. J Ophthalmol 2022; 2022: 4857696.

135.

Gonzales

Ladas

Davis

, et al. Relationships between laser flare photometry values and complications of uveitis. Arch Ophthalmol 2001; 119: 1763–1769.

136.

Murakami

Yoshida

Ikeda

, et al. Relationship between aqueous flare and visual function in retinitis pigmentosa. Am J Ophthalmol 2015; 159: 958-63.e1.

137.

Kato

Nagashima

Matsubara

, et al. Transient increase of flicker electroretinography amplitudes after cataract surgery: association with postoperative inflammation. Ophthalmol Sci 2023; 3: 100243.

138.

Kato

Suzuki

Hayashi

, et al. Risk factors for contraction of the anterior capsule opening after cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28: 109–112.

139.

El-Harazi

Feldman

Ruiz

, et al. Consensual inflammation following ocular surgery. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers 1999; 30: 254–259.

140.

Oshika

Kato

Changes in aqueous flare and cells after mydriasis. Jpn J Ophthalmol 1989; 33: 271–278.

141.

Schauersberger

Kruger

Müllner-Eidenböck

, et al. Long-term disorders of the blood-aqueous barrier after small-incision cataract surgery. Eye (Lond) 2000; 14 (Pt 1): 61–63.

Factors influencing aqueous flare after cataract surgery and its evaluation with laser flare photometry

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Results

Preoperative

Intraoperative

Incision

Nucleus disassembly

Ophthalmic viscosurgical devices

Irrigating solutions and antibiotics

Intraocular lenses

Postoperative regimen

Discussion

Conclusion

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Declarations

ORCID iD

References