Skip to content

Guidelines

TL;DR — Cataract guidance converges on a few points and diverges sharply on others. Convergence: do not restrict access by visual acuity alone; do not do routine preoperative medical tests for surgery under local anaesthesia; use intracameral antibiotic prophylaxis (García Anguas 2025, PMID 41027307; NICE NG77 recommendations 1.2.2, 1.8.5, retrieved 2026-08-31). Divergence: NICE tells the NHS not to offer multifocal IOLs at all and to use femtosecond-laser surgery only inside a randomised trial, positions no other major body takes (NICE NG77 recommendations 1.4.2 and 1.6.1, retrieved 2026-08-31). Methodological quality is uneven and applicability is the weakest domain everywhere: across 11 cataract guidelines appraised with AGREE II, documents from the USA, NICE and Peru scored well on rigour of development while guidelines from Asia, Chile and Mexico were not recommended (Sanguino-Jaramillo 2026, PMID 41364967). Even where evidence exists, guidelines change practice unevenly — a Danish national guideline shifted NSAID and topical-antibiotic prescribing but not toric IOL use or postoperative examination schedules (Kessel 2017, PMID 27966271). The catalogue of documents lives in literature/guidelines/REGISTRY.md; this page synthesises what they recommend.

The main documents

Body / document Year Region Type Reference
NICE NG77, Cataracts in adults: management 2017; last reviewed 20 May 2025 England National clinical guideline (web, mutable) NICE — "Cataracts in adults: management", https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng77, accessed 2026-08-31
AAO Cataract in the Adult Eye Preferred Practice Pattern 2022 USA Preferred practice pattern Miller 2022, PMID 34780842
ESCRS Recommendations for Cataract Surgery web edition Europe Society recommendations, question-structured ESCRS — "Recommendations for Cataract Surgery", https://www.escrs.org/escrs-guideline-for-cataract-surgery/, accessed 2026-08-31
Chinese guideline for cataract surgery in adults 2023 China National practice guideline (first Chinese guideline specifically on adult cataract surgery) Chinese Cataract and Refractive Surgery Society 2023, PMID 38061898
Canadian Ophthalmological Society evidence-based CPG 2008 Canada National guideline COS Expert Committee 2008, PMID 19177161
AAPPO / APVRS / APSOII endophthalmitis consensus 2025 Asia-Pacific Consensus statement with formal voting across three domains Sharma 2025, PMID 40825492
AAPPO / APMS highly myopic cataract consensus 2026 International / Asia-Pacific Two-round modified Delphi covering diagnosis, biometry, surgery and follow-up Du 2026, PMID 42044747
EUREQUO evidence-based guidelines 2012 Europe Registry-derived guidance from 523,921 extractions Lundström 2012, PMID 22541829
ICO diabetic eye-care recommendations 2018 International Resource-stratified recommendations Wong 2018, PMID 29776671

NICE NG77's status was re-checked live on 2026-08-31: the guideline was last reviewed on 20 May 2025, with a plan to update the recommendations on intraocular lens selection and an explicit decision not to update recommendations on biometry formulas, surgical timing and technique, bilateral simultaneous cataract surgery, or toric lenses. Two recommendations in the lens-selection section (1.4.1 and 1.4.4, on lens design and material) currently read "removed to allow for further consideration" — that is, the guideline is in a partially withdrawn state on exactly the question where the device literature is moving fastest.

Where guidance converges

Indication. NICE recommendation 1.2.2 is unambiguous: "Do not restrict access to cataract surgery on the basis of visual acuity", with the referral decision based on a discussion covering how the cataract affects vision and quality of life, laterality, risks and benefits, the consequences of declining surgery, and whether the person wants it (recommendation 1.2.1). This aligns with the evidence that acuity is a poor gauge of cataract disability (See 2019, PMID 30489358; Steinberg 1994, PMID 8185520) — see diagnosis and preoperative assessment.

No routine preoperative medical testing. A systematic review of five high-quality cataract CPGs identified two recommendations of wide agreement: avoiding routine preoperative medical tests for surgery under local anaesthesia, because they do not reduce complications; and using intracameral antibiotics (PMID 41027307). The randomised evidence is unambiguous (Keay 2019, PMID 30616299; Schein 2000, PMID 10639542), and observational work shows ophthalmologist-led pathways without dedicated anaesthesia support are safe — a finding whose title says explicitly that risk analysis "does not support current clinical ophthalmology guidelines" (Koolwijk 2015, PMID 25444350).

Intracameral antibiotic prophylaxis. NICE 1.8.5 instructs use of intracameral cefuroxime, with commercially or pharmacy-prepared solutions to prevent dilution errors (1.8.6) and preoperative antiseptics per standard surgical practice (1.8.4). The Asia-Pacific consensus covers the same ground across prophylaxis, diagnosis and standardised management, developed by systematic review plus structured expert voting (PMID 40825492). The underlying evidence — randomised for cefuroxime, observational for agent-level ranking — is in complications (ESCRS Endophthalmitis Study Group 2007, PMID 17531690; Kato 2022, PMID 36258003).

Anaesthesia. NICE 1.7.1–1.7.3: offer sub-Tenon's or topical (with or without intracameral) anaesthesia; consider peribulbar only if both are contraindicated; do not offer retrobulbar anaesthesia. Sedation by an experienced ophthalmic anaesthetist is a considered adjunct for anxiety, postural problems or long surgery (1.7.4), and hyaluronidase is a considered adjunct to sub-Tenon's (1.7.5). This matches the randomised comparison showing both techniques are acceptable with small pain differences (Guay 2015, PMID 26308931).

Wrong-lens prevention. NICE devotes a whole section (1.5) to it: verify identity before biometry; never hand-transcribe biometry results; use electronic transfer or securely fix printed results; base lens choice on the person's chosen refractive outcome and record it; use a WHO-based checklist modified to confirm identity, marked eye, a single matching IOL in theatre with identical and alternative lenses in stock, and two team members including the surgeon having checked formulas, calculations and constants; and treat a wrong-lens implant as a Never Event with root-cause analysis.

Where guidance diverges

Question NICE NG77 (England) Other bodies / evidence
Multifocal IOLs 1.4.2 "Do not offer multifocal intraocular lenses for people having cataract surgery" ESCRS structures a specific question on whether presbyopia-correcting IOLs outperform monofocals; network meta-analyses show real near/intermediate gains with photic trade-offs (Cho 2022, PMID 36136323; Li 2024, PMID 38627651); editorials argue for wider use (Nemet 2023, PMID 36902768)
Femtosecond-laser surgery 1.6.1 "Only use femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery as part of a randomised controlled trial that includes collection of resource-use data" Perspective and review literature advocates selective use in difficult eyes (Chen 2026, PMID 41679368; Levitz 2021, PMID 33833494); Cochrane finds low-certainty small reduction in posterior capsule tears and no clinically important acuity difference (Narayan 2023, PMID 37369549)
Biometry formulas 1.3.5 prescribes by axial length: <22.00 mm Haigis or Hoffer Q; 22.00–26.00 mm Barrett Universal II if installed on the device without hand transcription, otherwise SRK/T; >26.00 mm Haigis or SRK/T Contemporary network meta-analyses rank Kane, Olsen, EVO and Hill-RBF above these in the same axial-length bands (Zhang 2026, PMID 40971912; Ma 2024, PMID 37726043; Li 2026, PMID 41651446) — and NICE decided in May 2025 not to update this section
Toric IOLs Not recommended as a first-line astigmatism strategy; 1.4.5 considers on-axis surgery or limbal-relaxing incisions ESCRS asks explicitly from what magnitude of corneal astigmatism a toric IOL is indicated; 13 RCTs give high-quality evidence of better uncorrected acuity and spectacle independence with toric IOLs (Kessel 2016, PMID 26601819)
Bilateral simultaneous surgery 1.6.3 consider for people at low risk of complications, or needing general anaesthesia that carries increased risk or distress; 1.6.4 mandates a specific risk discussion Randomised non-inferiority evidence and cost-effectiveness now support wider use (Spekreijse 2023, PMID 37201546); guidance varies internationally with bilateral-risk tolerance and reimbursement (Singh 2017, PMID 27684294; Nowrouzi 2024, PMID 38390776)
Day-1 review 1.9.3 "Do not offer in-person, first-day review to people after uncomplicated cataract surgery" Peak IOP occurs 3–4 hours postoperatively (Grzybowski 2019, PMID 30489361); a 291-patient RCT found similar complication rates with and without next-day review after uneventful surgery, but was underpowered for rare harm (Chatziralli 2012, PMID 22738668)

The multifocal and FLACS positions are the sharpest divergences in the field. Both are defensible as health-system decisions for a publicly funded service — they are statements about value, not about whether the technology works — but they are frequently read as clinical statements, which they are not.

Other NICE positions worth recording

  • Biometry technique (1.3.1–1.3.4): optical biometry for axial length, ultrasound only when optical is impossible or inaccurate; keratometry for corneal curvature; consider corneal topography for abnormally flat or steep corneas, irregular corneas, significant astigmatism, prior corneal refractive surgery, or when accurate keratometry is unobtainable.
  • Post-refractive eyes (1.3.6–1.3.7): advise that refractive outcomes are difficult to predict and further surgery may be needed; adjust for the altered anterior–posterior corneal relationship and do not use standard biometry or historical data alone.
  • Constant optimisation (1.3.8): surgeons should consider modifying the manufacturer's recommended IOL constant using their own previous deviations from predicted outcomes.
  • Second-eye prediction (1.3.9): consider using 50% of the first-eye prediction error to guide second-eye IOL power.
  • Risk stratification (1.3.10–1.3.13): consider a validated risk stratification algorithm, explain the result to the person, supervise trainees closely in high-risk cases or where complications would be especially severe (for example, a single functional eye), and explain that delaying surgery in a densifying cataract increases complication risk. Note that no such validated algorithm currently meets methodological standards — the eight published models lack multivariable modelling, standardised outcomes and external validation (Kang 2025, PMID 39900805).
  • Complications (1.8.1–1.8.10): consider intracameral phenylephrine for floppy iris syndrome risk; do not use capsular tension rings routinely but consider them in pseudoexfoliation; offer topical steroids and/or NSAIDs to prevent inflammation and cystoid macular oedema, and consider the combination in higher-risk eyes such as diabetes and uveitis; follow a defined protocol for posterior capsule rupture; offer eye protection if residual anaesthetic effect persists at discharge.
  • Postoperative systems (1.9.1–1.9.2): commissioners and providers must ensure processes to identify complications with prompt specialist access, completion of the UK Minimum Cataract Dataset for National Audit, and arrangements to discuss second-eye surgery; collecting patient visual function and quality-of-life data into an electronic dataset is a "consider" recommendation.

Guideline quality and evidence base

Assessment Finding Source
AGREE II appraisal of AAO, COS and RCOphth guidelines Domain scores 36–75% (AAO), 45–94% (COS), 23–85% (RCOphth); ICCs for mean-score reliability 0.78, 0.74, 0.80 Wu 2015, PMID 25253766
AGREE II appraisal of 11 cataract CPGs, 2000–2023 USA, NICE and Peru scored high on rigour of development and scope/purpose; guidelines from Asia, Chile and Mexico not recommended; applicability was the weakest domain across all Sanguino-Jaramillo 2026, PMID 41364967
Reliable systematic reviews supporting AAO PPP topics Systematic reviews mapped to the 24 management categories of the 2011 PPP; reliability assessed against prespecified criteria and cross-checked against citation in the 2016 update Golozar 2018, PMID 29800249
Synthesis of five high-quality cataract CPGs Variability found, but two recommendations were widely agreed: avoid routine preoperative medical tests for local anaesthesia; use intracameral antibiotics García Anguas 2025, PMID 41027307
Do guidelines change practice? After a 2013 Danish national guideline, surgeons became more likely to prescribe NSAID drops and less likely to prescribe topical antibiotics; toric IOL use and postoperative examination patterns did not change Kessel 2017, PMID 27966271

Registry-derived guidance is a distinct model: EUREQUO produced evidence-based guidelines covering only those steps of the cataract pathway analysable in the database, built from 523,921 extractions entered between January 2009 and August 2011 (PMID 22541829). It answers a narrower set of questions than a consensus guideline but from far larger denominators.

The historical literature is a reminder that these documents have a lifecycle: the 1993 AHCPR panel work on cataract in adults (O'Day 1993, PMID 8140702) and the 1995 argument for revising it (O'Day 1995, PMID 7786210) show a guideline being interrogated for whether new evidence justified re-opening it — the same question NICE answered partially in May 2025.

Adjacent guidance that touches cataract

  • Diabetic eye care. The International Council of Ophthalmology's resource-stratified recommendations for screening, follow-up, referral and treatment govern the retinal management that determines cataract surgical outcome in diabetes (PMID 29776671); screening recommendations for people with diabetes are summarised in (Robin 2021, PMID 33602543), and cataract-specific management strategies in (Peterson 2018, PMID 29144826).
  • Congenital aniridia. European COST action ANIRIDIA-NET guidelines cover a condition in which cataract surgery is one component of complex anterior-segment management (Romano 2026, PMID 40892309).
  • Highly myopic cataract. A 2026 international two-round Delphi consensus reached ≥75% agreement on combined IOL formula calculations, hydrophobic acrylic lenses and a three-month retinal examination, while immediate bilateral surgery, routine capsular tension rings and postoperative steroid regimens remained disputed (Du 2026, PMID 42044747).
  • Endophthalmitis treatment. Antibiotic therapy for postoperative endophthalmitis has its own review literature (Wang 2002, PMID 12759845); management is in red flags and safety concerns.
  • Training. Resident education standards are a guideline-adjacent domain with its own evidence on learning curves and simulator use (Ament 2011, PMID 21107259).

Open questions

  • Should NICE's multifocal and FLACS positions be re-examined? Both were explicitly excluded from the May 2025 update decision for FLACS-adjacent topics, while the IOL-selection section was flagged for update and two recommendations sit withdrawn (NICE NG77, accessed 2026-08-31); the underlying network meta-analyses (PMID 36136323; PMID 38627651) and Cochrane review (PMID 37369549) post-date the 2017 recommendations.
  • Why do biometry-formula recommendations lag? NICE 1.3.5 names Haigis, Hoffer Q, Barrett Universal II and SRK/T, and the May 2025 decision was not to update this section; contemporary network meta-analyses in the same axial-length bands rank Kane, Olsen, EVO and Hill-RBF above several of these (PMID 40971912; PMID 37726043; PMID 41651446), though usually without statistical significance.
  • Can applicability be fixed? Applicability was the weakest AGREE II domain across all 11 appraised cataract guidelines (PMID 41364967), and one guideline demonstrably changed only two of several targeted behaviours (PMID 27966271); no implementation trial of a cataract guideline with behavioural endpoints was identified in the searches behind this page.
  • What should replace the "validated risk stratification algorithm" NICE asks for? The recommendation presumes such an algorithm exists; the systematic review of eight published models found none with external validation (PMID 39900805).
  • Is the guideline landscape geographically representative? The appraised set is dominated by high-income and English-language documents (PMID 41364967; PMID 25253766), and this page's registry makes no absence claim for regions not covered.

References

  1. García Anguas M, Seva-Llor AM, Cabrera Beyrouti R. Cataract care process: Systematic review of clinical guidelines and synthesis of recommendations. Journal of healthcare quality research. 2025;40:101161. PMID 41027307
  2. Sanguino-Jaramillo M, Domínguez-Vargas A, Galeano-Lopez J, et al. Evaluating the quality of cataract clinical practice guidelines: A systematic review using the AGREE II instrument. Journal francais d'ophtalmologie. 2026;49:104710. PMID 41364967
  3. Kessel L, Erngaard D, Flesner P, et al. Do evidence-based guidelines change clinical practice patterns?. Acta ophthalmologica. 2017;95:337-343. PMID 27966271
  4. Miller KM, Oetting TA, Tweeten JP, et al. Cataract in the Adult Eye Preferred Practice Pattern. Ophthalmology. 2022;129:P1-P126. PMID 34780842
  5. Chinese Cataract and Refractive Surgery Society. [Chinese guideline for cataract surgery in adults (2023)]. [Zhonghua yan ke za zhi] Chinese journal of ophthalmology. 2023;59:977-987. PMID 38061898
  6. Canadian Ophthalmological Society Cataract Surgery Clinical Practice Guideline Expert Committee. Canadian Ophthalmological Society evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for cataract surgery in the adult eye. Canadian journal of ophthalmology. Journal canadien d'ophtalmologie. 2008;43 Suppl 1:S7-57. PMID 19177161
  7. Sharma N, Bari A, Rao SK, et al. Controversies, Consensuses, and Guidelines on Preventing, Diagnosing and Managing Acute-onset Bacterial Endophthalmitis after Cataract Surgery by the Academy of Asia-Pacific Professors of Ophthalmology (AAPPO), the Asia-Pacific Vitreo-retina Society (APVRS), and the Asia-Pacific Society of Ocular Inflammation and Infection (APSOII). American journal of ophthalmology. 2025;280:436-457. PMID 40825492
  8. Lundström M, Barry P, Henry Y, et al. Evidence-based guidelines for cataract surgery: guidelines based on data in the European Registry of Quality Outcomes for Cataract and Refractive Surgery database. Journal of cataract and refractive surgery. 2012;38:1086-93. PMID 22541829
  9. Wong TY, Sun J, Kawasaki R, et al. Guidelines on Diabetic Eye Care: The International Council of Ophthalmology Recommendations for Screening, Follow-up, Referral, and Treatment Based on Resource Settings. Ophthalmology. 2018;125:1608-1622. PMID 29776671
  10. See CW, Iftikhar M, Woreta FA. Preoperative evaluation for cataract surgery. Current opinion in ophthalmology. 2019;30:3-8. PMID 30489358
  11. Steinberg EP, Tielsch JM, Schein OD, et al. The VF-14. An index of functional impairment in patients with cataract. Archives of ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960). 1994;112:630-8. PMID 8185520
  12. Keay L, Lindsley K, Tielsch J, et al. Routine preoperative medical testing for cataract surgery. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2019;1:CD007293. PMID 30616299
  13. Schein OD, Katz J, Bass EB, et al. The value of routine preoperative medical testing before cataract surgery. Study of Medical Testing for Cataract Surgery. The New England journal of medicine. 2000;342:168-75. PMID 10639542
  14. Koolwijk J, Fick M, Selles C, et al. Outpatient cataract surgery: incident and procedural risk analysis do not support current clinical ophthalmology guidelines. Ophthalmology. 2015;122:281-7. PMID 25444350
  15. Endophthalmitis Study Group, European Society of Cataract & Refractive Surgeons. Prophylaxis of postoperative endophthalmitis following cataract surgery: results of the ESCRS multicenter study and identification of risk factors. Journal of cataract and refractive surgery. 2007;33:978-88. PMID 17531690
  16. Kato A, Horita N, Namkoong H, et al. Prophylactic antibiotics for postcataract surgery endophthalmitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of 6.8 million eyes. Scientific reports. 2022;12:17416. PMID 36258003
  17. Guay J, Sales K. Sub-Tenon's anaesthesia versus topical anaesthesia for cataract surgery. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2015;2015:CD006291. PMID 26308931
  18. Cho JY, Won YK, Park J, et al. Visual Outcomes and Optical Quality of Accommodative, Multifocal, Extended Depth-of-Focus, and Monofocal Intraocular Lenses in Presbyopia-Correcting Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis. JAMA ophthalmology. 2022;140:1045-1053. PMID 36136323
  19. Li J, Sun B, Zhang Y, et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of all kinds of intraocular lenses in presbyopia-correcting cataract surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC ophthalmology. 2024;24:172. PMID 38627651
  20. Nemet A, Kanclerz P, Tuuminen R. Should Multifocal Intraocular Lenses Become a Standard in Phacoemulsification Cataract Surgery?. Journal of clinical medicine. 2023;12. PMID 36902768
  21. Chen X, Zhong Y, Wang K, et al. Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery: Precision, Practice, and the Path to Personalization. American journal of ophthalmology. 2026;285:213-217. PMID 41679368
  22. Levitz LM, Dick HB, Scott W, et al. The Latest Evidence with Regards to Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery and Its Use Post 2020. Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.). 2021;15:1357-1363. PMID 33833494
  23. Narayan A, Evans JR, O'Brart D, et al. Laser-assisted cataract surgery versus standard ultrasound phacoemulsification cataract surgery. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2023;6:CD010735. PMID 37369549
  24. Zhang G, Ma Y, Liu Z, et al. Intraocular lens power calculation formula accuracy in 1178 eyes with short axial length: systematic review and network meta-analysis. Journal of cataract and refractive surgery. 2026;52:202-207. PMID 40971912
  25. Ma Y, Xiong R, Liu Z, et al. Network Meta-analysis of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formula Accuracy in 1016 Eyes With Long Axial Length. American journal of ophthalmology. 2024;257:178-186. PMID 37726043
  26. Li X, Cheung R, Nayeni M, et al. Predictive accuracy of Hill-RBF 3.0 versus other intraocular lens power calculation methods: systematic review and meta-analysis. Canadian journal of ophthalmology. Journal canadien d'ophtalmologie. 2026;61:528-537. PMID 41651446
  27. Kessel L, Andresen J, Tendal B, et al. Toric Intraocular Lenses in the Correction of Astigmatism During Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 2016;123:275-286. PMID 26601819
  28. Spekreijse L, Simons R, Winkens B, et al. Safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of immediate versus delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery in the Netherlands (BICAT-NL study): a multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet (London, England). 2023;401:1951-1962. PMID 37201546
  29. Singh R, Dohlman TH, Sun G. Immediately sequential bilateral cataract surgery: advantages and disadvantages. Current opinion in ophthalmology. 2017;28:81-86. PMID 27684294
  30. Nowrouzi A, Alió JL. Immediately sequential bilateral cataract surgery. Current opinion in ophthalmology. 2024;35:17-22. PMID 38390776
  31. Grzybowski A, Kanclerz P. Early postoperative intraocular pressure elevation following cataract surgery. Current opinion in ophthalmology. 2019;30:56-62. PMID 30489361
  32. Kang C, Zhu AS, Waldman O, et al. Cataract surgery risk stratification models: a systematic review. Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie. 2025;263:1229-1238. PMID 39900805
  33. Wu CM, Wu AM, Young BK, et al. An evaluation of cataract surgery clinical practice guidelines. The British journal of ophthalmology. 2015;99:401-4. PMID 25253766
  34. Golozar A, Chen Y, Lindsley K, et al. Identification and Description of Reliable Evidence for 2016 American Academy of Ophthalmology Preferred Practice Pattern Guidelines for Cataract in the Adult Eye. JAMA ophthalmology. 2018;136:514-523. PMID 29800249
  35. O'Day DM, Steinberg EP, Dickersin K. Systematic literature review for clinical practice guideline development. Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society. 1993;91:421-36; discussion 437-8. PMID 8140702
  36. O'Day DM. Socioeconomics viewpoint: the need for an update of the clinical practice guideline on cataract. Archives of ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960). 1995;113:718-20. PMID 7786210
  37. Robin A, Giovingo M. Screening recommendations for diabetics. Disease-a-month : DM. 2021;67:101116. PMID 33602543
  38. Peterson SR, Silva PA, Murtha TJ, et al. Cataract Surgery in Patients with Diabetes: Management Strategies. Seminars in ophthalmology. 2018;33:75-82. PMID 29144826
  39. Romano D, Romano V, Daruich A, et al. Congenital aniridia: European COST action ANIRIDIA-NET guidelines for diagnosis, management and care. Acta ophthalmologica. 2026;104:267-279. PMID 40892309
  40. Wang RC, Lou PL, Ryan EA, et al. Antibiotic therapy in post-operative endophthalmitis. Seminars in ophthalmology. 2002;17:153-61. PMID 12759845
  41. Ament CS, Henderson BA. Optimizing resident education in cataract surgery. Current opinion in ophthalmology. 2011;22:64-7. PMID 21107259
  42. Du Y, Meng J, Alió JL, et al. International consensuses and guidelines on clinical management of highly myopic cataracts: A two-round modified e-Delphi study by the Academy of Asia-Pacific Professors of Ophthalmology (AAPPO) and the Asia-Pacific Myopia Society (APMS). Asia-Pacific journal of ophthalmology (Philadelphia, Pa.). 2026;15:100322. PMID 42044747
  43. Chatziralli IP, Sergentanis TN, Kanonidou E, et al. First postoperative day review after uneventful phacoemulsification cataract surgery: is it necessary? BMC research notes. 2012;5:333. PMID 22738668