Literature DB >> 28831699

Comparison of cumulative dissipated energy delivered by active-fluidic pressure control phacoemulsification system versus gravity-fluidics.

Roberto Gonzalez-Salinas1, Manuel Garza-Leon2, Manuel Saenz-de-Viteri3, Juan C Solis-S4, Rosario Gulias-Cañizo5,6, Hugo Quiroz-Mercado7.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the cumulative dissipated energy (CDE), aspiration time and estimated aspiration fluid utilized during phacoemulsification cataract surgery using two phacoemulsification systems .
METHODS: A total of 164 consecutive eyes of 164 patients undergoing cataract surgery, 82 in the active-fluidics group and 82 in the gravity-fluidics group were enrolled in this study. Cataracts graded NII to NIII using LOCS II were included. Each subject was randomly assigned to one of the two platforms with a specific configuration: the active-fluidics Centurion ® phacoemulsification system or the gravity-fluidics Infiniti ® Vision System. CDE, aspiration time (AT) and the mean estimated aspiration fluid (EAF) were registered and compared.
RESULTS: A mean age of 68.3 ± 9.8 years was found (range 57-92 years), and no significant difference was evident between both groups. A positive correlation between the CDE values obtained by both platforms was verified (r = 0.271, R 2 = 0.073, P = 0.013). Similarly, a significant correlation was evidenced for the EAF (r = 0.334, R 2 = 0.112, P = 0.046) and AT values (r = 0.156, R 2 = 0.024, P = 0.161). A statistically significantly lower CDE count, aspiration time and estimated fluid were obtained using the active-fluidics configuration when compared to the gravity-fluidics configuration by 19.29, 12.10 and 9.29%, respectively (P = 0.001, P < 0.0001 and P = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The active-fluidics Centurion ® phacoemulsification system achieved higher surgical efficiency than the gravity-fluidics Infiniti ® IP system for NII and NIII cataracts.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Active-fluidics; Cataract surgery; Cumulative dissipated energy; Gravity-fluidics; Phacoemulsification

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28831699     DOI: 10.1007/s10792-017-0674-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0165-5701            Impact factor:   2.031


  19 in total

1.  Endothelial cell loss after phacoemulsification: relation to preoperative and intraoperative parameters.

Authors:  T Walkow; N Anders; S Klebe
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 3.351

Review 2.  The physics of phaco: a review.

Authors:  Mark Packer; William J Fishkind; I Howard Fine; Barry S Seibel; Richard S Hoffman
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.351

3.  Comparative analysis of coaxial phacoemulsification with 2.2- and 2.8-mm clear corneal incisions.

Authors:  Harinder Singh Sethi; Komal Saluja; Mayuresh P Naik
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 2.031

4.  Comparison of torsional and longitudinal modes using phacoemulsification parameters.

Authors:  Marek Rekas; Robert Montés-Micó; Karolina Krix-Jachym; Adam Kluś; Andrzej Stankiewicz; Teresa Ferrer-Blasco
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.351

Review 5.  Evidence-based guidelines for cataract surgery: guidelines based on data in the European Registry of Quality Outcomes for Cataract and Refractive Surgery database.

Authors:  Mats Lundström; Peter Barry; Ype Henry; Paul Rosen; Ulf Stenevi
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2012-04-26       Impact factor: 3.351

6.  Preoperative cataract grading by Scheimpflug imaging and effect on operative fluidics and phacoemulsification energy.

Authors:  Donald R Nixon
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.351

Review 7.  The consequences of waiting for cataract surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  William Hodge; Tanya Horsley; David Albiani; Julia Baryla; Michel Belliveau; Ralf Buhrmann; Michael O'Connor; Jason Blair; Elizabeth Lowcock
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2007-04-24       Impact factor: 8.262

8.  Clinical study using a new phacoemulsification system with surgical intraocular pressure control.

Authors:  Kerry D Solomon; Ramón Lorente; Doug Fanney; Robert J Cionni
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 3.351

Review 9.  A Review of Laser-Assisted Versus Traditional Phacoemulsification Cataract Surgery.

Authors:  H Burkhard Dick; Tim Schultz
Journal:  Ophthalmol Ther       Date:  2017-02-10

10.  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

View more
  7 in total

1.  Optical coherence tomography angiography evaluation of the effects of phacoemulsification cataract surgery on macular hemodynamics in Chinese normal eyes.

Authors:  Xinyu Jia; Yinjuan Wei; Hui Song
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-08-04       Impact factor: 2.031

2.  Comparing surgical efficiencies between phacoemulsification systems: a single surgeon retrospective study of 2000 eyes.

Authors:  Luis Escaf-Jaraba; Jorge Escobar-DiazGranados; Bartolomé Valdemarín
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-04-18       Impact factor: 1.779

3.  Does low infusion pressure microincision cataract surgery (LIPMICS) reduce frequency of post-occlusion breaks?

Authors:  Hanga Beres; Diego de Ortueta; Benedikt Buehner; Gabor Bernd Scharioth
Journal:  Rom J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022 Apr-Jun

4.  Testing a Novel Device for Accurate Ultrasound Delivery During Crystalline Lens Phacoemulsification Surgery.

Authors:  Tommaso Rossi; Stefano Saffioti; Giampiero Angelini; Giorgio Querzoli; Serena Telani; Alessandro Rossi; Guido Ripandelli
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2020-02-12       Impact factor: 3.283

5.  Clinical Performance and Surgeon Acceptability of a New Dual Mode Phacoemulsification System.

Authors:  Gabriel Quesada; Daniel H Chang; Kevin L Waltz; Andrew A Kao; Rodrigo Quesada; Ying Wang; Leilei Ji; Dari Parizadeh; Luis Atiles
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-08-06

6.  A prospective randomized clinical trial of active-fluidics versus gravity-fluidics system in phacoemulsification for age-related cataract (AGSPC).

Authors:  Yu Luo; Hongyu Li; Wenqian Chen; Yi Gao; Tianju Ma; Zi Ye; Zhaohui Li
Journal:  Ann Med       Date:  2022-12       Impact factor: 5.348

7.  Active-fluidics versus gravity-fluidics system in phacoemulsification for age-related cataract (AGSPC): study protocol for a prospective, randomised, double-blind, controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Yu Luo; Hongyu Li; Wenqian Chen; Yi Gao; Tianju Ma; Zi Ye; Zhaohui Li
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-01-20       Impact factor: 2.692

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.