Emilie L Ungricht1, Catherine Culp, Phillip Qu, Nathan Jensen, Jacob T Harris, Ben J Brintz, Nick Mamalis, Randall J Olson, Liliana Werner. 1. From the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, John A. Moran Eye Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (Ungricht, Culp, Qu, Jensen, Harris, Mamalis, Olson, Werner); University of Utah, School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah (Ungricht, Jensen, Harris); Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah (Brintz).
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare corneal endothelial damage from longitudinal and torsional ultrasound during phacoemulsification. SETTING: John A. Moran Eye Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. DESIGN: Experimental study. METHODS: 9 New Zealand white rabbits underwent bilateral surgery. After incision, the Intrepid Balanced Tip of the Centurion Ozil handpiece was inserted into the anterior chamber, and the following settings were used: 50 mL/min flow, 70 mm Hg intraocular pressure, 600 mm Hg vacuum, and 60% longitudinal (1 eye) or torsional (contralateral eye) ultrasound for 30 seconds. Cumulative dissipated energy (CDE) was noted. After euthanasia and enucleation, the corneas were removed, stained with trypan blue/alizarin red, and photographed (400× photographs from 5 specific areas and 1 overview photograph from each corneal button). The ImageJ program was used to evaluate cell damage and loss in the photographs obtained from each cornea. RESULTS: Cavitation bubbles around the phacoemulsification tip were generally observed in the longitudinal group. CDE was 17.4 ± 0.58 and 6.93 ± 0.15 in the longitudinal and torsional groups, respectively (P = .003). The percentage of intact cells was statistically higher in the torsional group (94.22% ± 5.99% vs 56.85% ± 22.29%), and the percentage of lost cells was statistically higher in the longitudinal group (42.10% ± 22.02% vs 4.97% ± 6.23%) (P = .003). This was observed in the analysis of the 400× photographs and the overview photographs. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that torsional ultrasound was associated with significantly less corneal endothelial cell damage than classical longitudinal tip motion, providing further insight on mechanisms of corneal endothelial damage during phacoemulsification.
PURPOSE: To compare corneal endothelial damage from longitudinal and torsional ultrasound during phacoemulsification. SETTING: John A. Moran Eye Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. DESIGN: Experimental study. METHODS: 9 New Zealand white rabbits underwent bilateral surgery. After incision, the Intrepid Balanced Tip of the Centurion Ozil handpiece was inserted into the anterior chamber, and the following settings were used: 50 mL/min flow, 70 mm Hg intraocular pressure, 600 mm Hg vacuum, and 60% longitudinal (1 eye) or torsional (contralateral eye) ultrasound for 30 seconds. Cumulative dissipated energy (CDE) was noted. After euthanasia and enucleation, the corneas were removed, stained with trypan blue/alizarin red, and photographed (400× photographs from 5 specific areas and 1 overview photograph from each corneal button). The ImageJ program was used to evaluate cell damage and loss in the photographs obtained from each cornea. RESULTS: Cavitation bubbles around the phacoemulsification tip were generally observed in the longitudinal group. CDE was 17.4 ± 0.58 and 6.93 ± 0.15 in the longitudinal and torsional groups, respectively (P = .003). The percentage of intact cells was statistically higher in the torsional group (94.22% ± 5.99% vs 56.85% ± 22.29%), and the percentage of lost cells was statistically higher in the longitudinal group (42.10% ± 22.02% vs 4.97% ± 6.23%) (P = .003). This was observed in the analysis of the 400× photographs and the overview photographs. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that torsional ultrasound was associated with significantly less corneal endothelial cell damage than classical longitudinal tip motion, providing further insight on mechanisms of corneal endothelial damage during phacoemulsification.
Authors: Peter J Ness; Nick Mamalis; Liliana Werner; Surekha Maddula; Don K Davis; Eric D Donnenfeld; Randall J Olson Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2010-08-03 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Steven D Aust; Scott Terry; Thomas Hebdon; Broc Gunderson; Michael Terry; Ramon Dimalanta Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 3.351