Journals / Glokom Katarakt / 2007 / Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 4

Bimanual microincision cataract surgery

Bimanuel küçük kesili katarakt cerrahisi

Pages
227–235
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: Although some problems persist, bimanual microincision cataract surgery remains a secure and promising surgical tech- nique.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: To investigate the safety and efficacy of bimanual microin- cision cataract surgery by comparing with 2.2 mm microcoaxial surgical technique.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: Thirty-five eyes of 30 patients underwent bi- manual microincisional cataract surgery (group I) while 35 eyes of 27 patients had 2.2 mm clear corneal incision microcoaxial phacoemulsification (group II).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Although some problems persist, bimanual microincision cataract surgery remains a secure and promising surgical tech- nique.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Fakoemülsifikasyon · Oftalmolojik cerrahi işlemler · Karşılaştırmalı çalışma

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the safety and efficacy of bimanual microin- cision cataract surgery by comparing with 2.2 mm microcoaxial surgical technique. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five eyes of 30 patients underwent bi- manual microincisional cataract surgery (group I) while 35 eyes of 27 patients had 2.2 mm clear corneal incision microcoaxial phacoemulsification (group II). The appropriateness of the gro- ups was investigated by determining 3 parameters that make the operation easier or harder. Accordingly, preoperative cataract hardness, pupil and capsulorhexis diameters were compared first. As the cataract hardness was determined to be greater in Group II, another group (Group IIb) consisting of 20 eyes of 17 patients compatible with Group I was formed and this group was used in comparisons. Preoperatively, central corneal thickness measu- rements were obtained besides routine ophthalmic examinations in all patients. Peroperative phaco time (PT), mean phaco time percentage (AP%) (PTP), effective phaco time (EPT), total operation time (TOT), peroperative complications and the last incision widths were recorded. Postoperative controls were performed on the 1st, 7th, 30th and 90th days. In these controls, visual acuity, pachymetric corneal thickness and contrast sensitivity measurements were ob- tained. In Group I, intraocular lenses with different properties were used by making incision widths adequate. Results: The mean age of the patients was 64.9±4.2 in Group I and 67.0±7.0 in Group II (p>0.05) and the average follow-up period was 128.9±25.6 days in Group I and 119.3±22.4 days in Group II (p>0.05). Preoperative visual acuities and corneal thicknesses were similar in the groups (p>0.05). Mean cataract hardness was 1.85±0.8 in Group I, 2.54±0.8 in Group II (p<0.05) and 1.90±0.4 in Group IIb (p>0.05). Parameters recorded during the operation in Group I were mean TOT 16.3±6.9 min, mean PT 0.17±0.0 sec, mean PTP 6.80±2.9%and EPT 6.80±2.9 sec, whi- le the same parameters were 13.1±3.3, 0.23±0.1, 13.05±8.1 and 2.29±2.2 in Group II and 13.1±3.4, 0.17±0.1, 11.3±9.2 and 1.54±1.9 in Group IIb, respectively. Statistical comparisons between Group I and II exhibited significant difference in terms of TOT, PT, PTP and EPT (p<0.05). However, there was no statistically significant difference in comparison of Group I with Group IIb in which cataract hardnesses were concordant (p>0.05). No signi- ficant difference was determined between the groups in terms of increase from preoperative values of visual acuity, contrast sensiti- vity or pachymetric corneal thickness or complications (p>0.05). Conclusion: Although some problems persist, bimanual microincision cataract surgery remains a secure and promising surgical tech- nique.

Özet

Amaç: Bimanuel küçük kesili katarakt cerrahisinin güvenilirliği ve et- kiliğinin, 2,2 mm. kesiden yapılan mikrokoaksiyel cerrahi teknikle karşılaştırılarak araştırılmasıdır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Otuz olgunun 35 gözüne bimanuel küçük kesili ka- tarakt cerrahisi (grup I), 27 hastanın 35 gözüne 2.2 mm saydam kornea kesili mikrokoaksiyel fakoemulsifikasyon (grup II) uygulan- dı. Grupların kıyaslanmasında uygunluk araştırılması ameliyatı güçleştiren ya da kolaylaştıran 3 parametre ile yapıldı. Buna göre ameliyat öncesi katarakt sertlikleri, pupilla çapları ve kapsülorek- sis çapları öncelikle karşılaştırıldı. Katarakt sertliğinin grup II’de anlamlı fazla olması üzerine bu grubun içinden grup I ile uyumlu 17 hasta ve 20 gözden oluşan grup IIb oluşturularak ilgili karşı- laştırmalarda bu grup kullanıldı. Ameliyat öncesinde tüm hasta- larda, rutin standart muayenenin yanında, santral kornea kalınlığı ölçümleri yapıldı. Ameliyat sırasında fako-zamanı (FZ), kullanılan ortalama fako gücü yüzdesi (KFY), etkili fako zamanı (EFZ), tüm ameliyat süresi (TAZ), oluşan komplikasyonlar, en son kesi ge- nişliği kaydedildi. Olguların kontrolleri ameliyat sonrası birinci, yedinci, otuzuncu ve doksanıncı günlerde yapıldı. Bu konrollerde görme keskinliği, pakimetrik kornea kalınlığı ve kontrast duyarlılık ölçümleri yapıldı. Grup I’de ameliyatlar sonrasında kesi genişlikle- ri uygun hale getirilerek farklı özellikte göziçi lensleri kullanıldı. Bulgular: Hastaların, ortalama yaşı Grup I’de 64.9±4.2 Grup II’de 67.0±7.0 (p>0.05) ve ortalama takip süresi grup I’de 128.9±25.6 Grup II’de 119.3±22.4 gündü (p>0.05). Ame- liyat öncesi görme keskinlikleri ve kornea kalınlıkları her iki grupta benzerdi (p>0.05). Ortalama katarakt sertliği grup I’de 1.85±0.8, grup II’de 2.54±0.8 (P 0.05). Ameliyat sırasında elde edilen değerler, Grup I de; ortalama TAZ 16.3±6.9 dk., ortalama FZ, 0.17±0.0 sn., ortalama FGY %6.80±2.9, EFZ 0.78±0.5 sn. iken bu değerler grup 2’de sırası ile 13.1±3.3, 0.23±0.1, 13.05±8.1 ve 2.29±2.2 Grup IIb’de 13.1±3.4, 0.17±0.1, 11.3±9.2 ve 1.54±1.9 olarak bulundu. Grup I ile II arasında yapılan istatistiki karşılaştırmalar ortalama TAZ, FZ, FGY ve EFZ yönünden anlamlı farklılıklar gösterdi (p 0.05). Pre-operatif değere göre gruplar arasında, görme keskinliği artışı, kontrast duyarlılık ve pa- kimetrik kornea kalınlığı artışı ve komplikasyonlar yönünden fark saptanmadı (p>0.05). Sonuç: Uygun seçilmiş olgularda bimanuel küçük kesili katarakt cerra- hisi bazı sorunlarının devam etmesine rağmen güvenilir ve umut verici bir cerrahi teknik olarak yerini korumaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

CAN, İ., Takmaz, T., NACAROĞLU, Ş. A., GENÇ, İ., SOYUGELEN, G. (2007). Bimanual microincision cataract surgery. Glokom Katarakt, Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 4, 227–235. https://ajindex.com/articles/226921

References (16)

  1. Kelman CD: Phaco-emulsification and aspiration; a new techni- que of cataract removal; a preliminary report. Am J Ophthalmol. 1967;64:23-35
  2. Osher RH, Injev VP.: Thermal study of bare tips with various system parameters and incision sizes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006;32:867-872
  3. Osher RH, Injev VP.: Microcoaxial phacoemulsification Part 1: La- boratory studies. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007;33:401-407
  4. Osher RH.: Microcoaxial phacoemulsification Part 2: Clinical study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007;33:408-412
  5. Vasavada V, Vasavada V, Raj SM: Intraoperative performance and postoperative outcomes of microcoaxial phacoemulsification Ob- servational study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007;33:1019-1024
  6. Crema AS, Walsh A, Yamane Y et al.: Comparative study of coa- xial phacoemulsification and microincision cataract surgery One year follow-up. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007;33:1014-1018
  7. Cavallini GM, Campi L, Masini C, et al.: Bimanual microphaco- emulsification: Prospective study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007; 33:387-392
  8. Agarwal A, Agarwal A, Agarwal S et al.: Phaconit: phacoemul- sification through a 0.9 mm. corneal incision. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001;27:1548-1552
  9. Tsuneoka H, Shiba T, Takahashi Y.: Ultrasounic phacoemulsifica- tion using a 1.4 mm incision: clinical results. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002;28:81-86
  10. Alio J, Rodriguez-Pratz JL, Galal A, et al.: Outcomes of microin- cision cataract surgery versus coaxial phacoemulsification. Oph- thalmology. 2005;112:1997-2003
  11. Alio J, Rodriguez-Pratz JL, Vianello A, et al.: Visual outcome of microincision cataract surgery with implantation of an Acri.Smart lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;31:1549-1556
  12. Chang DF.: 400 mm Hg high-vacuum bimanual phaco attainab- le with the Staar cruise control device (letter) J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004;30:932-933
  13. Tsuneoka H, Hayama A, Takahama M.: Ultrasmall–incision bi- manual phacoemulsification and AcrySof SA30AL implantation through a 2.2 mm. incision. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003;29: 1070-1076
  14. Fine IH, Hoffman RS, Packer M.: Optimizing refractive lens exc- hange with bimanual microincision phacoemulsification. J Cata- ract Refract Surg. 2004;30:550-554
  15. Assaf A, El-Moatassem Kotb AM.: Feasibility of bimanual mic- roincision phacoemulsification in hard cataracts. Eye. 2007;21: 807-811
  16. Haripriya A, Aravind S, Vadi K, et al.: Bimanual microphaco for posterior cataracts. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006;32:914-917.