Literature DB >> 18343350

A fluidics comparison of Alcon Infiniti, Bausch & Lomb Stellaris, and Advanced Medical Optics Signature phacoemulsification machines.

Dan Georgescu1, Annie F Kuo, Krista I Kinard, Randall J Olson.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare three phacoemulsification machines for measurement accuracy and postocclusion surge (POS) in human cadaver eyes.
DESIGN: In vitro comparisons of machine accuracy and POS.
METHODS: Tip vacuum and flow were compared with machine indicated vacuum and flow. All machines were placed in two human cadaver eyes and POS was determined.
RESULTS: Vacuum (% of actual) was 101.9% +/- 1.7% for Infiniti (Alcon, Fort Worth, Texas, USA), 93.2% +/- 3.9% for Stellaris (Bausch & Lomb, Rochester, New York, USA), and 107.8% +/- 4.6% for Signature (Advanced Medical Optics, Santa, Ana, California, USA; P < .0001). At 60 ml/minute flow, actual flow and unoccluded flow vacuum (UFV) was 55.8 +/- 0.4 ml/minute and 197.7 +/- 0.7 mm Hg for Infiniti, 53.5 +/- 0.0 ml/minute and 179.8 +/- 0.9 mm Hg for Stellaris, and 58.5 +/- 0.0 ml/minute and 115.1 +/- 2.3 mm Hg for Signature (P < .0001). POS in an 32-year-old eye was 0.33 +/- 0.05 mm for Infiniti, 0.16 +/- 0.06 mm for Stellaris, and 0.13 +/- 0.04 mm for Signature at 550 mm Hg, 60 cm bottle height, 45 ml/minute flow with 19-gauge tips (P < .0001 for Infiniti vs Stellaris and Signature). POS in an 81-year-old eye was 1.51 +/- 0.22 mm for Infiniti, 0.83 +/- 0.06 mm for Stellaris, 0.67 +/- 0.01 mm for Signature at 400 mm Hg vacuum, 70 cm bottle height, 40 ml/minute flow with 19-gauge tips (P < .0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Machine-indicated accuracy, POS, and UFV were statistically significantly different. Signature had the lowest POS and vacuum to maintain flow. Regarding POS, Stellaris was close to Signature; regarding vacuum to maintain flow, Infiniti and Stellaris were similar. Minimizing POS and vacuum to maintain flow potentially are important in avoiding ocular damage and surgical complications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18343350     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2008.01.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0002-9394            Impact factor:   5.258


  7 in total

1.  Comparison of surgical parameters using different lens fragmentation patterns in eyes undergoing laser-assisted cataract surgery.

Authors:  Harvey S Uy; Pik Sha Chan; Raquel Gil-Cazorla; Sunil Shah
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-03-04       Impact factor: 2.031

2.  Phaco-efficiency test and re-aspiration analysis of repulsed particle in phacoemulsification.

Authors:  Jae-hyung Kim; Dong-Ah Ko; Jae Yong Kim; Myoung Joon Kim; Hungwon Tchah
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 3.117

3.  Effectiveness of intraoperative intraocular lens use on improving surgical safety for dense cataract phacoemulsification: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Mingbing Zeng; Rong Wang; Bing Cheng; Chengwu Yang; Yunxin Chen; Xialin Liu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-01-31       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Comparative analysis of corneal morphological changes after transversal and torsional phacoemulsification through 2.2 mm corneal incision.

Authors:  Ahmed Assaf; Maged Maher Roshdy
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-01-08

5.  Efficacy and safety of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus conventional phacoemulsification for cataract: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Xiaoyun Chen; Wei Xiao; Shaobi Ye; Weirong Chen; Yizhi Liu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-08-13       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Comparison of occlusion break responses and vacuum rise times of phacoemulsification systems.

Authors:  Pooria Sharif-Kashani; Douglas Fanney; Val Injev
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-07-30       Impact factor: 2.209

7.  Prospective randomized comparative study between venturi and peristaltic pumps in WhiteStar Signature® phacoemulsification machine.

Authors:  Wilson Takashi Hida; André Lins de Medeiros; André Gustavo de Araújo Rolim; Antonio Francisco Pimenta Motta; Danilo Varela Kniggendorf; Rodrigo Lafetá Franco de Queiroz; Mário Augusto Pereira Dias Chaves; Pedro Carlos Carricondo; Celso Takashi Nakano; Walton Nosé
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-12-27
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.