Journals / MN Oftalmoloji / 2016 / Cilt: 23 - Sayı: 4

Comparison of the Effects on the Postoperative Intraocular Pressure of the Intraocular Lens Implantation Under Viscoelastic Material Versus Continuous Irrigation in Phacoemulsification Surgery

Fakoemülsifikasyon Cerrahisinde Viskoelastik Madde veya İrigasyon Vasıtasıyla Yapılan İntraoküler Lens İmplantasyonunun Postoperatif Göz İçi Basınçlarına Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması

Pages
210–213
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: If viscoelastic material is completely aspirated from both the anterior chamber and the capsular bag behind the lens following phacoemulsification, the traditional method has minimal effect on postoperative intraocular pressure.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: We aimed to evaluate the effect of two methods (using a cohesive viscoelastic material composed of 1% sodium hyaluronate versus hydroimplantation technique using continue irrigation by side port for intraocular lens implantation) in phacoemulsification surgery retrospectively.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Method: The study included 72 patients with senile cataract.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: If viscoelastic material is completely aspirated from both the anterior chamber and the capsular bag behind the lens following phacoemulsification, the traditional method has minimal effect on postoperative intraocular pressure.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to evaluate the effect of two methods (using a cohesive viscoelastic material composed of 1% sodium hyaluronate versus hydroimplantation technique using continue irrigation by side port for intraocular lens implantation) in phacoemulsification surgery retrospectively. Material and Method: The study included 72 patients with senile cataract. Intraocular pressure was measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry preoperatively as well as on the first postoperative day. Results: The mean preoperative Intraocular pressure was 15.89±1.81 mmHg in viscoelastic material group, and was 16.21±1.78 mmHg in hydroimplantation group (p=0.562). The mean postoperative Intraocular pressure was 16.79±2.10 mmHg in viscoelastic material group, and was 16.82±1.83 mmHg in hydroimplantation group (p=0.954). The difference between preoperative and postoperative Intraocular pressure was 0.92±1.02 mmHg in viscoelastic material group, and 1.02±1.05 mmHg in hydroimplantation group (p=0.810). Conclusion: If viscoelastic material is completely aspirated from both the anterior chamber and the capsular bag behind the lens following phacoemulsification, the traditional method has minimal effect on postoperative intraocular pressure.

Özet

Amaç: Fakoemülsifikasyon cerrahisinde göz içi lens yerleştirilmesi için kullanılan iki metodun (%1 sodyum hiyalüronat içeren kohezif viskoelastik madde kullanımı ve yan girişten daimi irigasyon yoluyla yapılan hidroimplantasyon tekniği) ameliyat sonrası göz içi basıncı üzerineetkisini geriye dönük olarak değerlendirmeyi amaçladık. Gereç ve Yöntem: Komplikasyonsuz fakoemülsifikasyon cerrahisi geçiren 72 hasta çalışmaya dahil edildi. Goldmann aplanasyon tonometrisi ile göz içi basınçları katarakt ameliyatından hemen önce ve ameliyat sonrası birinci günde ölçüldü. Bulgular: Ameliyat öncesi göz içi basıncı viskoelastik madde grubunda 15,89±1,81 mmHg iken hidroimplantasyon grubunda 16,21±1,78mmHg idi (p=0,562). Ameliyat sonrası göz içi basıncı viskoelastik madde grubunda 16,79±2,10 mmHg iken hidroimplantasyon grubunda16,82±1,83 mmHg idi (p=0,954). Ameliyat öncesi ve sonrası basınç farkları karşılaştırıldığında viskoelastik madde grubunda 0,92±1,02 mmHgiken hidroimplantasyon grubunda 1,02±1,05 mmHg idi. Gruplar arasındaki fark istatistiksel olarak anlamsızdı (p=0,810).Sonuç: Fakoemülsifikasyon sonrası viskoelastik madde hem ön kamaradan hem de lens arkasındaki kapsüler keseden tamamen temizlendiği takdirde geleneksel yöntemin postoperatif göz içi basıncına etkisi çok azdır.

🔖

Cite This Article

TOYRAN, S., AKAY, F., UYAR, M., BİLGİN, S., KARAHAN, E. (2016). Comparison of the Effects on the Postoperative Intraocular Pressure of the Intraocular Lens Implantation Under Viscoelastic Material Versus Continuous Irrigation in Phacoemulsification Surgery. MN Oftalmoloji, Cilt: 23 - Sayı: 4, 210–213. https://ajindex.com/articles/295590

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Rainer G, Menapace R, Findl O. Intraocular pressure rise after small incision cataract surgery: a randomised intraindividual com- parasion of two dispersive viscoelastic agents. Br J Ophthalmol 2001;85:139-42.
  2. Ahmet II, Kranemann C, Chipman M, et al. Revisiting early post- operative and follow-up after phacoemulsification J Cataract Refract Surg 2002;28:100-8.
  3. Shingleton BJ, Wadhwani RA, O' Donoghue MW, et al. Evalua - tion of intraocular pressure in the immediate period after pha- coemulsification. Cataract Refreact Surg 2001;27:524-7.
  4. Holzer MP, Tetz MR, Auffarth GU, et al. Effect of Healon 5 and 4 other viscoelastic substances on intraocular pressure and en- dothelium after cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001;27: 213-8.
  5. Shwenn O, Dİck HB, Krummenauer F, et al. Healon 5 versus Visoat during cataract surgery: Intraocular pressure, laser flare and corneal changes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2000: 238:861-7.
  6. Güveli AK, Mavi E, Adaş A. ve ark. Fakoemülsifikasyon Sonrası Erken Dönem Göz İçi Basıncını Etkileyen Faktörler. T Oft Gaz 2003;33:697-702. Espíndola RF, Castro EF, Santhiago MR, et al. A clinical compar- ison between DisCoVisc and 2% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose in phacoemulsification: a fellow eye study. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2012;67:1059-62.
  7. Waseem M, Rustam N, Qamar ul Islam. Intraocular pressure after phacoemulsification using hydroxypropyl methylcellulose and sodium hyaluronate as viscoelastics. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2007;19:42-5.
  8. Thirumalai B, Blamires TL, Brooker L, et al. Heavier molecular weight ocular viscoelastic devices and timing of post-operative review following cataract surgery. BMC Ophthalmol 2007;7:2. Kovacevic S, Pastar Z, Sessa Z, et al. Comparison of the effect of two viscoelastic agents on an early postoperative intraocular pres- sure. Coll Antropol 2005;29:115-7. Skorkovská S, Michálek J, Masková Z, et al. Effect of viscoelas- tic substances on postoperative intraocular pressure in Phaco - emulsi fication. Cesk Slov Oftalmol 2005;61:13-9.
  9. Yang H, Zheng D, Huang J, et al. The clinical study of Healon 5 in phacoemulsification and IOL implantation. Yan Ke Xue Bao 2001;17:186-90.
  10. Watts P, Austin M. Retained Viscoat and intraocular pressure after phaceomulsification. Indian J Ophthalmol 1999;47:237-40.
  11. Mastropasqua L, Carpineto P, Ciancaglini M, et al. Intraocular pressure changes after phacoemulsification and foldable silicone lens implantation using Healon GV. Ophthalmologica 1998;212: 318-21.
  12. Probst LE, Hakim OJ