Literature DB >> 11226801

Healon5 viscoadaptive formulation: Comparison to Healon and Healon GV.

H B Dick1, F Krummenauer, A J Augustin, T Pakula, N Pfeiffer.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the rheological characteristics of a viscoadaptive viscoelastic formulation with those of 2 standard ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs).
SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Johannes Gutenberg-University, and Max Planck-Institute for Polymer Research, Mainz, Germany.
METHODS: An independent comparative study of 3 OVDs of sodium hyaluronate (Healon(R), Healon GV(R), and Healon(R)5) was performed using the Advanced Rheometric Expansion System to analyze rheologic behavior (eg, dynamic frequency dependence of the complex viscosity) as well as rheological parameters (eg, viscosity at zero shear rate, pseudoplasticity, relaxation time, elastic and viscous modulus).
RESULTS: Mean viscosity at zero shear rate was 243 Pas +/- 5 (SD) for Healon, 2451 +/- 12 Pas for Healon GV, and 5525 +/- 14 Pas for Healon5. Mean pseudoplasticity was 173 +/- 7, 754 +/- 10, and 591 +/- 6, respectively. Mean relaxation time was 21 +/- 3 sec, 83 +/- 4 sec, and 88 +/- 6 sec. At low shear rates, viscosity and elasticity (elastic and viscous modulus) increased from Healon through Healon5. Healon5 exhibited a dynamic behavior of the complex viscosity dependent on the duration of the shear rate exposure: At low shear rates, it slowly built up a high viscosity. At higher shear rates, it demonstrated a lower viscosity that decreased further during constant exposure to a specific shear rate.
CONCLUSIONS: Healon5 had the highest viscosity and elasticity when exposed to low and high shear rates. These characteristics maintain anterior chamber depth. Also, the high viscosity of Healon5 exhibited a dynamic frequency dependence. In the presence of turbulence and phaco power (continuous high shear rates), it became dispersive by fragmentation and formed a cavity with an outer retentive shell. The cohesive and dispersive properties of Healon5 make it the best of the 3 OVDs evaluated for use at all stages of phacoemulsification.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11226801     DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(00)00482-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg        ISSN: 0886-3350            Impact factor:   3.351


  7 in total

1.  Retention and removal of a new viscous dispersive ophthalmic viscosurgical device during cataract surgery in animal eyes.

Authors:  T Oshika; F Okamoto; Y Kaji; T Hiraoka; T Kiuchi; M Sato; K Kawana
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.638

2.  Capsulorhexis: Pearls and pitfalls.

Authors:  Mehrdad Mohammadpour; Reza Erfanian; Nasser Karimi
Journal:  Saudi J Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-01

3.  Alternative approach to treating malignant glaucoma after trabeculectomy with unplanned zonulectomy.

Authors:  Naoki Ozeki; Kenya Yuki; Itaru Kimura
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-05-06

4.  Management of Intraoperative Miosis during Pediatric Cataract Surgery using Healon 5.

Authors:  Vishal Jhanji; Namrata Sharma; Rasik B Vajpayee
Journal:  Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-01

5.  Retrospective Study of Vitreous Tap Technique Using Needle Aspiration for Management of Shallow Anterior Chamber during Phacoemulsification.

Authors:  Ashraf Ahmed Nossair; Wael Ahmed Ewais; Lamia Samy Ali
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 1.909

6.  A new histological evaluation method to detect residual ophthalmic viscosurgical devices for cataract surgery.

Authors:  Hidetsugu Mori; Haruhiko Yamada; Keiko Toyama; Kanji Takahashi
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2018-09-26

Review 7.  [Cataract surgery and the small eye: relative anterior microphthalmos, high hyperopia and nanophthalmos].

Authors:  Gerd U Auffarth; Tadas Naujokaitis; Maximilian Hammer
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2021-08-27       Impact factor: 1.059

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.