Original Article

Effect of Uncomplicated Cataract Surgery on Central
Macular Thickness in Diabetic and Non-diabetic

Subjects

Brahm Prakash Guliani, MS Ophthal1; Isha Agarwal, MBBS1; Mayuresh P. Naik, MBBS, MS, DNB2

1Department of Ophthalmology, Vardhaman Mahavir Medical College & Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India
2Department of Ophthalmology, Hamdard Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Hakeem Abdul Hameed Centenary

Hospital, New Delhi, India

ORCID:
Mayuresh Naik: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7167-557X

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the quantitative changes of macula in diabetic and non-diabetic eyes after
uncomplicated cataract surgery.
Methods: In this prospective interventional study being performed in a tertiary healthcare hospital, a
total of 660 eyes were divided into two groups. Group 1 included 330 eyes from healthy subjects and
group 2 included 330 eyes from well-controlled diabetic subjects with no diabetic retinopathy planned
for phacoemulsification with foldable IOL implantation by the same surgeon under similar settings.
Optical Coherence Tomography (Heidelberg Spectralis SD-OCT) was used to assess preoperative and
postoperative central macular thickness (CMT) at weeks 1 and 6.
Results: The mean CMT in group 1 preoperatively, at postoperative week 1, and at post-operative week 6
was 257.03 ± 20.904, 262.82 ± 17.010, and 265.15 ± 20.078 µm, respectively. The corresponding values
in group 2 were 255.36 ± 17.852, 259.15 ± 16.644, and 266.09 ± 18.844 µm, respectively. There was no
significant difference in the mean CMT values between the two groups on any of the three occasions when
the CMT was measured (P = 0.374 and P = 0.313 at weeks 1 and 6, respectively).
Conclusion: There was no statistically significant difference in CMT between normal subjects and diabetic
subjects without diabetic retinopathy preoperatively and in early postoperative period after uncomplicated
phacoemulsification surgery.

Keywords: Central Macular Thickness; Diabetic Macular Edema; Uncomplicated Phacoemulsification

J Ophthalmic Vis Res 2019; 14 (4): 442–447

Correspondence to:

Mayuresh P. Naik, MBBS, MS, DNB. Room No. 3 of
Eye OPD, First floor of OPD building, Department of
Ophthalmology, H.I.M.S.R & H.A.H.C Hospital, near GK-
2, Alaknanda, New Delhi 110062, India.
E-mail: mayureshpnaik@gmail.com

Received: 17-02-2018 Accepted: 24-03-2019

Access this article online

Website:
https://knepublishing.com/index.php/JOVR

DOI:
10.18502/jovr.v14i4.5447

INTRODUCTION

Cataract extraction is one of the most commonly
performed ophthalmic surgeries. Recent innova-
tions in instrumentation, lens design, and surgical
technique have improved the outcome of cataract
surgery.[1] Currently, the preferred technique is

This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of
the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which
allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as
long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the
identical terms.

How to cite this article: Guliani BP, Agarwal I, Naik MP. Changes in CMT after
Cataract Surgery. J Ophthalmic Vis Res 2019;14:442–447.

442 © 2019 JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMIC AND VISION RESEARCH | PUBLISHED BY PUBLISHED BY KNOWLEDGE E

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.18502/jovr.v14i4.5447&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2019-07-17
https://knepublishing.com/index.php/JOVR


Cataract Surgery and CMT; Guliani et al

phacoemulsification using small incisions and
implantation of a foldable intraocular lens (IOL).[2]
This is an efficient procedure, and uneventful
surgery is generally associated with good visual
results.[3] However, the development of cystoid
macular edema (CME) can lead to suboptimal
postoperative vision.[4] This can occur in patients
with ocular diseases, such as uveitis or diabetic
retinopathy (DR), even after uncomplicated cataract
surgery.[5]

CME following cataract surgery was initially
reported by Irvine in 1953 and demonstrated angio-
graphically by Gass and Norton in 1966 and has
come to be known as the Irvine Gass syndrome.[6]

It is not uncommon to encounter CME in other-
wise healthy eyes after uneventful phacoemulsifi-
cation surgery.[7] The incidence after phacoemul-
sification is reported to be 0.1–2% in healthy
populations.[7]

Although the exact pathophysiology is not
known, the role of surgical trauma with the release
of prostaglandins and blood–retinal barrier disrup-
tion is suspected.[8] Light toxicity and vitreomacular
traction might also have a role.[9]

The incidence of pseudophakic CME depends
on the methodology used in its detection. It has
been suggested that prophylactic use of non-
steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs preoperatively,
and steroids and anti-inflammatory drugs in the
postoperative period, reduces the incidence of
postoperative pseudophakic CME.[10]

Diabetes mellitus increases the probability of
developing cataract and the risk of decreased
visual outcomes after cataract surgery.[7]

It has been suggested that in diabetics mac-
ular edema after cataract surgery occurs pre-
dominantly in those with concurrent pre-existing
diabetic macular edema (DME) involving the center
of the macula.[11] While others have reported that
the development of postoperative macular edema
does not need pre-existing DME,[11] these were
published before the availability of optical coher-
ence tomography (OCT) technology. The dynamics
of macular edema and cataract surgery in those
with DR can be explored using the qualitative and
quantitative OCT-based data.

Here we evaluate the retinal thickness
changes in the early postoperative course of
six weeks in non-diabetic and diabetic subjects
after uncomplicated phacoemulsification with
intracapsular IOL implantation.

METHODS

Ethical clearance was obtained from the Ethics
Committee, the Institutional Review Board at Vard-
haman Mahavir Medical College (V.M.M.C), and the
Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi.

This tertiary health center-based observational
study was conducted on adult patients posted
for cataract surgery at the Department of Oph-
thalmology, VMMC and Safdarjung Hospital, New
Delhi. Assuming the effect size to be 0.8 (ratio of
difference of two means/standard error), power to
be 85%, and the level of significance to be 5%, a
sample size of 330 eyes per group, including the
10% loss to follow-up, was required for the study,
using software G power 3.1.

The patients were divided into two groups based
on the inclusion and exclusion criteria as follows:
GROUP 1, 330 healthy subjects planned for pha-
coemulsification with foldable IOL implantation by
the same surgeon under similar settings; GROUP
2, 330 well-controlled diabetic subjects with no DR
posted for phacoemulsification with foldable IOL
implantation by the same surgeon under similar
settings.

The inclusion criteria for group 1 (healthy
subjects) included age > 40 years and senile
cataract undergoing uncomplicated cataract
surgery. Patients with complicated cataract
surgery, intraocular pressure > 21 mmHg,
dense white cataract in whom OCT could not
be performed, and any ocular diseases that might
influence central macular thickness (CMT), such
as glaucoma, uveitis, and age-related macular
degeneration, were excluded from the study.
Patients with a history of previous eye surgery or
a history of macular edema in the fellow eye were
also excluded.

Group 2 (well-controlled diabetic subjects) had
similar inclusion criteria along with a diagnosis of
diabetes mellitus of any duration, controlled on
oral hypoglycemic agents or insulin, blood sugar
< 200 mg% (All-India-Ophthalmological-Society
(AIOS) Guidelines to Prevent Intraocular Infection,
2009) and HbA1C < 7% (American Diabetes Asso-
ciation ADA A1C Goals, Standards of Medical Care
in Diabetes-2015), and an absence of any evidence
of DR as assessed by indirect ophthalmoscopy
and OCT.[12] Besides similar exclusion criteria as
for group 1, group 2 patients were also excluded
based on the presence of anemia [men (> 15 yr), <

JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMIC AND VISION RESEARCH Volume 14, Issue 4, October-December 2019 443



Cataract Surgery and CMT; Guliani et al

13 g/dL; women (> 15 yr), < 12 g/dL],[13] pregnancy,
or diabetic nephropathy (abnormal kidney function
test including serum electrolytes, microalbumin-
uria, serum creatinine, and serum urea).

OCT (Heidelberg Spectralis SD-OCT) was used
to assess pre- and postoperative (at weeks 1 and 6)
CMT (central subfield thickness equating to mean
thickness in the central 1000-μm diameter area).

Repeated measure analysis and multiple com-
parison correction with the Bonferroni method
were applied to the data. P < 0.05 was considered
statistically significant.

RESULTS

The majority of the patients (47%) were in the age
group of 51–60 years [Table 1]. More than half of the
patients in group 1 (54.5%) and 39.4% of patients
in group 2 were between 51 and 60 years old (no
significant difference when comparing groups, P =
1.71).

The mean age in group 1 was 58.30 ± 7.66 years,
while the mean age in group 2 was 63.24 ± 9.74
years (P = 2.89).

Overall, the study comprised of 390 (59%) males
and 270 (41%) females [Table 1]. Group 1 comprised
of 51.5% males and 48.5% females and group 2 of
66.7% males and 33.3% females (P = 2.12).

The mean CMT values in group 1 preoperatively
and at postoperative weeks 1 and 6 were 257.03
± 20.90, 262.82 ± 17.01, and 265.15 ± 20.07 µm,
respectively [Table 2]. The mean CMT changes in
group 1 preoperatively versus postoperative week
1 versus postoperative week 6 were statistically
significant (both P-values < 0.001). The mean CMT
changes at postoperative weeks 1 and 6 were also
significantly different (P-value < 0.001).

The mean CMT values in group 2 preoperatively,
at postoperative week 1, and at postoperative week
6 were 255.36 ± 17.85, 259.15 ± 16.64, and 266.09
± 18.84 µm, respectively [Table 2].

The mean CMT changes in group 2 preopera-
tively versus postoperative week 1 versus postop-
erative week 6 were both statistically significant
(P-value < 0.001). The mean CMT changes at
postoperative weeks 1 and 6 were also significantly
different (P-value < 0.001).

No significant difference was noted in the mean
CMT values between the two groups on any of the
three occasions when CMT was measured [Table

2]. There was no significant change in the variation
of mean CMT at weeks 1 and 6 postoperatively
from baseline when groups 1 and 2 were compared
[Table 2].

In our study, none of the patients developed
clinical macular edema or CME on OCT.

DISCUSSION

This prospective comparative study was under-
taken to assess the effect of uncomplicated pha-
coemulsification procedure with IOL implantation
on CMT in diabetic and nondiabetic subjects in
the early postoperative period (up to six weeks).
The CMT used for comparison among the study
subjects in our study corresponded to the mean
thickness of all points in the central subfield of 1-
mm diameter of the ETDRS macular subfields. The
CMT was assessed with OCT preoperatively, and
at weeks 1 and 6 postoperatively, and comparisons
were made between the measurements of the
two study groups. The macula in healthy controls
as well as in controlled diabetics without DR
was increased significantly at the end of the first
and sixth weeks postoperatively compared to the
preoperative results. In both groups, this thickening
persisted until six weeks postoperatively in all
subjects and did not regress to preoperative levels
till the last follow-up at six weeks. This study
demonstrated that the influence of uncomplicated
cataract surgery on CMT in well-controlled diabetic
patients without DR did not significantly differ from
healthy non-diabetic subjects after uncomplicated
cataract surgery. In other words, well-controlled
diabetics without DR and nondiabetic patients
showed similar intragroup thickening of the central
macular subfield at weeks 1 and 6 after uncom-
plicated phacoemulsification, and the intergroup
comparison was not statistically significant.

The rate of development of macular edema
following cataract surgery at different time intervals
in people with diabetes (with or without DR) varies
from 31% to 81%.[14] Certain minimal changes in
the retina like subclinical CME and retinal leakage
can occur even after uneventful cataract surgery.
These subclinical changes in macular thickness
after cataract surgery can be easily diagnosed
on OCT and fluorescein angiography (FA).[15] It
has been reported by some studies that macu-
lar edema after cataract surgery, in people with
diabetes, may occur predominantly in patients

444 JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMIC AND VISION RESEARCH Volume 14, Issue 4, October-December 2019



Cataract Surgery and CMT; Guliani et al

Table 1. Age- and sex-wise distribution of study subjects among the two study groups

Age Groups (Years) GROUP 1 GROUP 2

Male Female Male Female

41–50 30 (9.09%) 20 (6.06%) 20 (6.06%) 10 (3.03%)

51–60 100 (30.30%) 80 (24.24%) 70 (21.21%) 60 (18.18%)

61–70 40 (12.12%) 40 (12.12%) 50 (15.15%) 40 (12.12%)

> 70 15 (4.54%) 5 (1.51%) 40 (12.12%) 40 (12.12%)

Total 170 (51.5%) 160 (48.5%) 220 (66.7%) 110 (33.3%)

Total 330 (100%) 330 (100%)

Table 2. Groups 1 and 2: Repeated measure analysis and multiple comparison correction with Bonferroni method depicting
change in mean central macular thickness from baseline to postoperative week 1 and week 6

GROUP 1 GROUP 2

Pre-op CMT 257.03 ± 20.904 255.36 ± 17.852

Week 1 post-op CMT 262.82 ± 17.010 259.15 ± 16.644

Week 6 post-op CMT 265.15 ± 20.078 266.09 ± 18.844

Change in mean CMT at
week 1 post-op as compared
to pre-op baseline

5.788 ± 11.324 (P-value
0.006 for INTRAGROUP
COMPARISON)

3.788 ± 6.066 (P-value
0.001 for INTRAGROUP
COMPARISON)

P-value 0.374 for
INTERGROUP COMPARISON

Change in mean CMT at
week 6 post-op as
compared to pre-op
baseline

8.121 ± 11.056 (P-value <
0.001 for INTRAGROUP
COMPARISON)

10.727 ± 9.722 (P-value <
0.001 for INTRAGROUP
COMPARISON)

P-value 0.313 for
INTERGROUP COMPARISON

Change in mean CMT at
week 6 post-op as
compared to week 1 post-op

2.333 ± 9.504 (P-value
0.172 for INTRAGROUP
COMPARISON)

6.939 ± 7.208 (P-value <
0.001 for INTRAGROUP
COMPARISON)

P-value 0.336 for
INTERGROUP COMPARISON

CMT, central macular thickness, pre-op, preoperative; post-op, postoperative

with concurrent pre-existing DME involving the
center of the macula. On the other hand, some
researchers have reported that for postoperative
macular edema to develop, pre-existing DME is
not required.[11] However, these studies were com-
pleted prior to the availability of OCT technology.
For detecting CME, the sensitivity and specificity
of OCT is 96% and 100%, respectively, compared
with FA.[16] OCT can detect not only macular
thickening before any angiographic evidence of
macular edema but also produces reproducible
and consistent quantitative results that are ideal

for follow-up and assessment of the treatment
response.[16, 17] For these reasons, we chose OCT
as the investigative modality in our observational
study.

There is some disagreement in the observations
of various studies reporting an increase in CMT
or development of macular edema after cataract
surgery in patients with diabetes without DR. In
a case-control study conducted on around 4,500
diabetics without preoperative macular edema, the
incidence of postoperative macular edema was
4%, which was higher than that in the population

JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMIC AND VISION RESEARCH Volume 14, Issue 4, October-December 2019 445



Cataract Surgery and CMT; Guliani et al

without diabetes (P < 0.001).[17] These authors
also reported a higher risk for the development
of macular edema (RR 1.80) in diabetic subjects
without DR compared to patients without diabetes
(RR 1.17).[17] On the other hand, Katsimpris et al
found increased macular thickness after uncom-
plicated cataract surgery in diabetics without DR
compared to preoperative values or to a control
group of patients at all follow-ups up to 12 months
after cataract surgery.[18] The eyes of diabetic
patients without DR presented higher CMT and
a higher incidence of CME after cataract surgery
compared to the eyes of healthy controls, thus
explaining the unsatisfactory visual acuity following
cataract surgery in these patients.[18] However,
a recently conducted meta-analysis among dia-
betic patients without DR observed no statistically
significant increase in CMT values after cataract
surgery at one, three, and six months after cataract
extraction.[19]

Many studies have postulated an associa-
tion between progression of DR and cataract
surgery,[20] whereas other studies did not observe
any significant association and consider any dia-
betic retinal changes as part of the natural course
of the disease.[21]

In our study, the preoperative CMT measured by
OCT is the same between the two groups. This is in
accordance with a study conducted by Massin et al,
who also found no differences in macular thickness
comparing healthy subjects and diabetics without
CME.[22]

There are, unfortunately, three limitations in our
study. First, there are certain variables affecting
the quality of OCT, despite it being a fast, non-
invasive, non-contact, reproducible, and reliable in-
vivo imaging technique.[23] When media opacities,
such as cataract, are present (especially in the
form of cortical and subcapsular types), reliable
scans might not be obtained preoperatively.[23]
To avoid this difficulty, we excluded patients
with dense media opacities. Second, though our
study showed no significant statistical difference
between the two groups, few other studies have
shown a significant rise in the CMT postoper-
atively in well-controlled diabetics with no DR.
Therefore, large-scale studies with a longer follow-
up period are likely required to accurately eluci-
date the role of diabetes control and DR status
on the postoperative visual prognosis of patients
undergoing uncomplicated phacoemulsification.

Last, the current study is limited by the duration
of follow-up of patients that precludes any firm
clinical conclusions based on the results of the
study.

In conclusion, CMT is increased after uncom-
plicated phacoemulsification both at weeks 1 and
6 postoperatively in both healthy nondiabetic
subjects and in well-controlled diabetic patients
without DR; the difference between the two groups
is not statistically significant. It is postulated that
good diabetes control is needed to prevent an
increase in CMT and postoperative macular edema
after uncomplicated uneventful phacoemulsifica-
tion procedure. However, long term follow-up stud-
ies may be required so that management algo-
rithms can be formulated in order to dictate our
surgical paradigms.

Financial Support and Sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of Interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

REFERENCES

1. DeCroos FC, Afshari NA. Perioperative antibiotics and
anti-inflammatory agents in cataract surgery. Curr Opin
Ophthalmol 2008;19:22–26.

2. Panchapakesan J, Rochtchina E, Mitchell P. Five-year
change in visual acuity following cataract surgery in an
older community: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Eye
2004;18:278–282.

3. Linebarger EJ, Hardten DR, Shah GK, Lindstrom RL.
Phacoemulsification and modern cataract surgery. Surv
Ophthalmol 1999;44:123–147.

4. O’Brien TP. Emerging guidelines for use of NSAID therapy
to optimize cataract surgery patient care. Curr Med Res
Opin 2005;21:1131–1137. Review Erratum in: Curr Med Res
Opin 2005;21:1431–1432.

5. Nelson ML, Martidis A. Managing cystoid macular edema
after cataract surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2003;14:39–
43.

6. Nelson ML, Martidis A. Managing cystoid macular edema
after cataract surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2003;14:39–
43.

7. Gass JD, Norton EW. Cystoid macular edema and
papilledema following cataract extraction. A fluorescein
fundoscopic and angiographic study. Arch Ophthalmol
1966;76:646–661.

446 JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMIC AND VISION RESEARCH Volume 14, Issue 4, October-December 2019



Cataract Surgery and CMT; Guliani et al

8. Ursell PG, Spalton DJ, Whitcup SM, Nussenblatt RB.
Cystoids macular edema after phacoemulsification:
relationship to blood-aqueous barrier damage and visual
acuity. J Catarct Refract Surg 1999;25:1492–1497.

9. Flach AJ. The incidence, pathogenesis and treatment of
cystoids macular edema following cataract surgery. Trans
Am Ophthalmol Soc 1998;96:557–634.

10. Rho DS. Treatment of acute pseudophakic cystoid macular
edema: diclofenac versus ketorolac. J Cataract Refract
Surg 2003;29:2378–2384.

11. Kim SJ, Equi R, Bressler NM. Analysis of macular edema
after cataract surgery in patients with diabetes using opti-
cal coherence tomography. Ophthalmology 2007;114:881–
889.

12. AIOS guidelines to prevent intraocular infection. 2009.
Available from http://www.aios.org/guidelines endoph
.pdf

13. FAO; WHO. World declaration and plan of action for
nutrition. In: International Conference on Nutrition. Rome:
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations;
December 1992.

14. Dowler JG, Sehmi KS, Hykin PG, Hamilton AM. The
natural history of macular edema after cataract surgery in
diabetes. Ophthalmology 1999;106:663–668.

15. Lara SA, Cakiner ET. Diabetes and cataract surgery: pre-
operative risk factors and positive nursing interventions.
Insight 2014;39:18–20.

16. Biro Z, Balla Z, Kovacs B. Change of foveal and perifoveal
thickness measured by OCT after phacoemulsification and

IOL implantation. Eye 2008;22:8–12.
17. Sahin M, Cingu AK, Gozum N. Evaluation of cystoid

macular edema using optical coherence tomography and
fundus autofluorescence after uncomplicated phacoemul-
sification surgery. J Ophthalmol 2013;2013:376013.

18. Katsimpris JM. , Petropoulos IK. , Zoukas G. , Patokos T. ,
Brinkmann C.K. , Theoulakis P.E. Central foveal thickness
before and after cataract surgery in normal and in diabetic
patients without retinopathy. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd
2012; 229:331-337.

19. Akcay BI, Bozkurt TK, Güney E, Unlü C, Erdogan G,
Akcali G, et al. Quantitative analysis of macular thickness
following uneventful and complicated cataract surgery.
Clin Ophthalmol 2012;6:1507–1511.

20. Chu CJ, Johnston RL, Buscombe C, Sallam AB, Mohamed
Q, Yang YC. Risk factors and incidence of macular edema
after cataract surgery a database study of 81984 eyes.
Ophthalmology 2016;123:316–323.

21. Liu J, Jones RE, Zhao J, Zhang J, Zhang F. Influence
of uncomplicated phacoemulsification on central macular
thickness in diabetic patients: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE
2015;10:e0126343.

22. Massin P, Bandello F, Garweg JG, Hansen LL, Harding SP,
Larsen M, et al. Safety and efficacy of ranibizumab in dia-
betic macular edema (RESOLVE study): A 12-month, ran-
domized, controlled, double-masked, multicenter phase II
study. Diabetes Care 2010;33:2399-405.

23. Henricsson M, Heijl A, Janzon L. Diabetic retinopathy
before and after cataract surgery. Br J Ophthalmol
1996;80:789–793.

JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMIC AND VISION RESEARCH Volume 14, Issue 4, October-December 2019 447

http://www.aios.org/guidelines