Literature DB >> 25466483

Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus standard phacoemulsification cataract surgery: outcomes and safety in more than 4000 cases at a single center.

Robin G Abell1, Erica Darian-Smith1, Jeffrey B Kan1, Penelope L Allen1, Shaun Y P Ewe1, Brendan J Vote2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the intraoperative complications and safety of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery and conventional phacoemulsification cataract surgery.
SETTING: Single center.
DESIGN: Prospective consecutive comparative cohort case series.
METHODS: Eyes had femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (study group) or phacoemulsification (control group) by 1 of 5 surgeons. The technique comprised manual corneal incisions and capsulorhexis or laser-assisted anterior capsulotomy, lens fragmentation, corneal incisions, phacoemulsification, and intraocular lens implantation.
RESULTS: The study group comprised 1852 eyes and the control group, 2228 eyes. Patient demographics were similar between groups. There was a significant improvement in vacuum/docking attempts, surface recognition adjustments, treatment, and vacuum time during the laser procedure in the study group. Anterior capsule tears occurred in 1.84% of eyes in the study group and 0.22% of eyes in the control group (P < .0001). There was no difference in the incidence of anterior capsule tears between the first half and second half of laser-assisted cases. Anterior capsulotomy tags occurred in 1.62% study group eyes. There was no significant difference in posterior capsule tears between the 2 groups (0.43% versus 0.18%). The incidence of significant intraoperative corneal haze and miosis was higher and the effective phacoemulsification time significantly lower in the study group (P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Significant intraoperative complications likely to affect refractive outcomes and patient satisfaction were low overall. The 2 cataract surgery techniques appear to be equally safe. Although anterior capsule tears remain a concern, the safety of femtosecond-assisted cataract surgery in terms of posterior capsule complications was equal to that of phacoemulsification. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
Copyright © 2015 ASCRS and ESCRS. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25466483     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.06.025

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


  41 in total

1.  Outcomes of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery performed by surgeons-in-training.

Authors:  Greg Brunin; Khurrum Khan; Kristin S Biggerstaff; Li Wang; Douglas D Koch; Sumitra S Khandelwal
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Review of intraoperative optical coherence tomography: technology and applications [Invited].

Authors:  Oscar M Carrasco-Zevallos; Christian Viehland; Brenton Keller; Mark Draelos; Anthony N Kuo; Cynthia A Toth; Joseph A Izatt
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 3.732

3.  Cell death and survival following manual and femtosecond laser-assisted capsulotomy in age-related cataract.

Authors:  Andrea Krisztina Sükösd; Judit Rapp; Diána Feller; György Sétáló; Beáta Gáspár; Judit E Pongrácz; Hajnalka Ábrahám; Zsolt Biró
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-09-18       Impact factor: 1.779

Review 4.  Hydrogel-based ocular drug delivery systems: Emerging fabrication strategies, applications, and bench-to-bedside manufacturing considerations.

Authors:  Remy C Cooper; Hu Yang
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2019-05-22       Impact factor: 9.776

5.  Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery with bimanual technique: learning curve for an experienced cataract surgeon.

Authors:  Gian Maria Cavallini; Tommaso Verdina; Michele De Maria; Elisa Fornasari; Elisa Volpini; Luca Campi
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-11-29       Impact factor: 2.031

6.  Safety and reliability of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery for Japanese eyes.

Authors:  Hiroko Bissen-Miyajima; Manabu Hirasawa; Kunihiko Nakamura; Yuka Ota; Keiichiro Minami
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 2.447

7.  Complications of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery combined with vitrectomy.

Authors:  Masaomi Kubota; Akira Watanabe; Tomoyuki Watanabe; Hideo Kono; Takaaki Hayashi; Tadashi Nakano
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-01-08       Impact factor: 2.031

8.  Comparison of cumulative dispersed energy (CDE) in femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) and conventional phacoemulsification.

Authors:  Osamah J Saeedi; Luke Y Chang; Sharon R Ong; Syed A Karim; Danielle S Abraham; Geoffrey L Rosenthal; Andrew Hammer; Brad V Spagnolo; Arturo E Betancourt
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-07-27       Impact factor: 2.031

9.  Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment following femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery.

Authors:  Subhendu Kumar Boral; Deepak Agarwal; Ayan Mohanta
Journal:  Oman J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-06-29

10.  Outcomes of conventional phacoemulsification versus femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery in eyes with Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy.

Authors:  Dagny C Zhu; Parth Shah; William J Feuer; Wei Shi; Ellen H Koo
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 3.351

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.