| Literature DB >> 26664740 |
Antonio M Fea1, Giulia Consolandi1, Giulia Pignata1, Paola Maria Loredana Cannizzo1, Carlo Lavia1, Filippo Billia1, Teresa Rolle1, Federico M Grignolo1.
Abstract
Purpose. To compare the corneal endothelial cell loss after phacoemulsification, alone or combined with microinvasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS), in nonglaucomatous versus primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) eyes affected by age-related cataract. Methods. 62 eyes of 62 patients were divided into group 1 (n = 25, affected by age-related cataract) and group 2 (n = 37, affected by age-related cataract and POAG). All patients underwent cataract surgery. Group 2 was divided into subgroups A (n = 19, cataract surgery alone) and B (n = 18, cataract surgery and MIGS). Prior to and 6 months after surgery the patients' endothelium was studied. Main outcomes were CD (cell density), SD (standard deviation), CV (coefficient of variation), and 6A (hexagonality coefficient) variations after surgeries. Results. There were no significant differences among the groups concerning preoperative endothelial parameters. The differences in CD before and after surgery were significant in all groups: 9.1% in group 1, 17.24% in group 2A, and 11.71% in group 2B. All endothelial parameters did not significantly change after surgery. Conclusions. Phacoemulsification determined a loss of endothelial cells in all groups. After surgery the change in endothelial parameters after MIGS was comparable to the ones of patients who underwent cataract surgery alone.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26664740 PMCID: PMC4664806 DOI: 10.1155/2015/769289
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Ophthalmol ISSN: 2090-004X Impact factor: 1.909
Preoperative demographic and operative data of the patients (mean ± standard deviation; LOCS: lens opacity classification system; CD: cell density; SD: standard deviation; CV: coefficient of variation; 6A: hexagonality coefficient; US: ultrasound; p: p value; N/A: not applicable).
| Group | 1 | 2A | 2B |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age (yrs) | 70.3 ± 2.5 | 68.8 ± 2.7 | 69.6 ± 2.2 | 0.064 | 0.347 | 0.332 |
| Gender m/f (%) | 17 (68)/8 (32) | 9 (47.4)/10 (52.6) | 15 (82.4)/4 (17.6) | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Cataract grade (LOCS III) | 3.71 ± 0.9 | 3.4 ± 0.8 | 3.64 ± 1.2 | 0.242 | 0.828 | 0.477 |
| CD (cell/mm2) | 2361.7 ± 477.9 | 2234.5 ± 344.7 | 2476.2 ± 300.6 | 0.332 | 0.376 | 0.052 |
| SD ( | 171.8 ± 84.2 | 173.8 ± 63.4 | 155.5 ± 41.9 | 0.932 | 0.455 | 0.31 |
| CV | 37.6 ± 9.8 | 36.9 ± 9.8 | 37.3 ± 8.2 | 0.816 | 0.916 | 0.894 |
| 6A (%) | 57.6 ± 10.5 | 55.5 ± 13.1 | 56.3 ± 7.5 | 0.558 | 0.656 | 0.822 |
| Total surgical time (mins) | 12.3 ± 2.5 | 12 ± 1.9 | 18.45 ± 2.9 | 0.665 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| Phacoemulsification time (sec) | 37.1 ± 19.7 | 34 ± 18.4 | 35.4 ± 17 | 0.598 | 0.769 | 0.812 |
| US power (%) | 20.8 ± 12 | 18.9 ± 6.1 | 20.5 ± 10.3 | 0.532 | 0.932 | 0.567 |
Difference and statistical analysis between preoperative and postoperative parameters (mean ± standard deviation; CD: cell density; SD: standard deviation; CV: coefficient of variation; 6A = hexagonality coefficient).
| Group | Parameters | CD | SD | CV | 6A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Preoperative | 2361.7 ± 477.9 | 171.8 ± 84.2 | 37.6 ± 9.8 | 57.6 ± 10.5 |
| Postoperative | 2147.3 ± 455.7 | 178.7 ± 63.9 | 38.1 ± 8.7 | 51.4 ± 10.1 | |
| Difference | −214.4 ± 362.6 | 6.92 ± 77.1 | 0.52 ± 10.2 | −6.24 ± 11.9 | |
|
| 2.956 | 0.449 | 0.256 | 2.607 | |
|
| 0.007 | 0.658 | 0.800 | 0.015 | |
|
| |||||
| 2A | Preoperative | 2234.5 ± 344.7 | 173.8 ± 63.4 | 36.9 ± 9.8 | 55.5 ± 13.1 |
| Postoperative | 1872.4 ± 393.5 | 216.7 ± 66.3 | 37.8 ± 8.1 | 55.9 ± 8.9 | |
| Difference | −362.1 ± 316 | 42.9 ± 71.2 | 0.95 ± 11.1 | 0.47 ± 11.9 | |
|
| 4.995 | 2.63 | 0.373 | 0.173 | |
|
| <0.001 | 0.017 | 0.713 | 0.865 | |
|
| |||||
| 2B | Preoperative | 2476.2 ± 300.6 | 155.5 ± 41.9 | 37.3 ± 8.2 | 56.3 ± 7.5 |
| Postoperative | 2185.8 ± 393.1 | 170.8 ± 50.1 | 36.2 ± 7.5 | 62.5 ± 10 | |
| Difference | −290.3 ± 322.4 | 15.3 ± 62.6 | −1.1 ± 12 | 6.2 ± 12.2 | |
|
| 4.592 | 1.25 | 0.459 | 2.573 | |
|
| <0.001 | 0.224 | 0.65 | 0.016 | |
Statistical analysis of the differences between pre- and postoperative data for the three groups (CD: cell density; SD: standard deviation; CV: coefficient of variation; 6A: hexagonality coefficient).
| Group | Parameters | CD | SD | CV | 6A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 versus 2A |
| 1.306 | 1.587 | 0.133 | 1.846 |
|
| 0.199 | 0.12 | 0.895 | 0.072 | |
|
| |||||
| 1 versus 2B |
| 0.792 | 0.427 | 0.513 | 3.661 |
|
| 0.432 | 0.671 | 0.610 | 0.001 | |
|
| |||||
| 2A versus 2B |
| 0.743 | 1.38 | 0.579 | 1.557 |
|
| 0.461 | 0.175 | 0.566 | 0.127 | |
Reported mean endothelial cell loss after cataract surgery (SICS: small incision cataract surgery; ECD: endothelial cell density) [20–25].
| Author | Year | Technique | Mean ECD loss (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Gogate et al. [ | 2010 | Phacoemulsification | 18.4 |
| SICS | 17.7 | ||
|
| |||
| Reuschel et al. [ | 2010 | Phacoemulsification | 7.2 |
|
| |||
| Mathew et al. [ | 2011 | Phacoemulsification | 16.6 |
|
| |||
| Tsuneoka et al. [ | 2002 | Phacoemulsification | 7.8 |
|
| |||
| Walkow et al. [ | 2000 | Phacoemulsification | 8.5 |
|
| |||
|
Ataş et al. [ | 2014 | Phacoemulsification | 6.41 |
|
| |||
| Present study | 2015 | Phacoemulsification | 12.2 |
| Phacoemulsification + stent | 11.71 | ||