| Literature DB >> 36211315 |
Narayan Bardoloi1, Sandip Sarkar1,2, Himangshu Das1, Pankaj S Burgute1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to describe a new phacoemulsification technique without hydroprocedures in patients of posterior polar cataract (PPC) and determine the posterior capsular rupture (PCR) and postoperative outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: Hydroprocedure; phacoemulsification; posterior polar cataract
Year: 2022 PMID: 36211315 PMCID: PMC9535904 DOI: 10.4103/sjopt.sjopt_22_21
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Saudi J Ophthalmol ISSN: 1319-4534
Figure 1(a) Approximately 5 mm capsulorhexis is performed using 30 G cystotome under irrigation, (b) Shaving of the cortex and epinucleus done within capsulorhexis area, (c) Primary chop and division of the nucleus into two halves done using chop in technique, (d) Nucleus is held at 7 o'clock position and chopping being done to take out a triangular piece of the nucleus, (e) Similar chopping performed at a 4 o'clock position of the nucleus with subsequent removal of a triangular piece of the nucleus, (f) The phaco tip and the chopper are being positioned at the cracked site of the lower two fragments. Using the two instruments, the fragments are pushed in the opposite direction and quickly taken out one after another
Figure 2(a) The last nuclear piece rotated and emulsified, (b) The epinuclear sheet comes out very quickly and can be aspirated with the phaco probe with lower parameters, (c) Injection of viscoelastic agents before removing the phaco probe to prevent the collapse of the AC, (d) Intraocular lens implanted in the capsular bag
Baseline demographic of the patients
| Parameters | Values |
|---|---|
| Number of patients | 77 |
| Gender, | |
| Male | 47 (61.03) |
| Female | 30 (38.96) |
| Age (years), mean±SD (range) | 51.87±14.19 (22-87) |
| Number of eyes, | 115 |
| Unilateral PPC | 39 (50.64) |
| Bilateral PPC | 38 (49.35) |
| PPC grade (according to Singh classification), | |
| Grade 1 | 7 (6.08) |
| Grade 2 | 48 (41.73) |
| Grade 3 | 39 (33.91) |
| Grade 4 | 21 (18.26) |
| UCVA, mean±SD | 0.867±0.57 logMAR |
| BCVA, mean±SD | 0.523±0.40 logMAR |
| Intraocular pressure (mmHg), mean±SD | 13.34±2.34 |
| Endothelial cell count (cells/mm2), mean±SD | 2356±256 |
UCVA: Uncorrected visual acuity, BCVA: Best-corrected visual acuity, SD: Standard deviation, PPC: Posterior polar cataract, logMAR: Logarithm of the Minimum Angle of Resolution
Distribution of cases according to the type of posterior polar cataract and their visual outcome
| Type of PPC | Number of eyes, | Postoperative BCVA | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20/20 or better, | 20/32-20/80, | 20/80-20/200, | ||
| Grade I | 7 (6.08) | 7 (100) | ||
| Grade II | 48 (41.73) | 44 (91.67) | 4 (8.33) | |
| Grade III | 39 (33.91) | 36 (92.30) | 3 (7.69) | |
| Grade IV | 21 (18.26) | 15 (71.42) | 4 (19.04) | 2 (9.52) |
| Total | 115 (100) | 102 (88.69) | 11 (9.56) | 2 (1.73) |
BCVA: Best-corrected visual acuity, PPC: Posterior polar cataract
Demographic of all posterior capsular rupture cases
| Age | Sex | Eye | PCR in eye | Preoperative BCVA | PCR occurred | Postoperative BCVA on day 30 | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 54 | Male | OU | OD | 20/40 | Plaque removal | 20/32 | AAV, 3-P IOL in sulcus |
| 62 | Male | OU | OS | 20/40 | Fragment removal | 20/25 | AAV, 3-P IOL in sulcus |
| 68 | Male | OS | OS | 20/125 | Plaque removal | 20/63 | AAV, 3-P IOL in sulcus |
| 72 | Female | OD | OD | 20/63 | Plaque removal | 20/40 | AAV, 3-P IOL in sulcus |
| 62 | Male | OS | OS | CF 3 mt | Chopping | 20/200 | Nuclear drop, AAV, 3-P IOL in sulcus |
| 71 | Male | OD | OD | 20/200 | Plaque removal | 20/40 | AAV, 3-P IOL in sulcus |
| 31 | Male | OU | OS | 20/80 | Epinucleus removal | 20/32 | AAV, 3-P IOL in sulcus |
| 33 | Male | OU | OS | 20/40 | Plaque removal | 20/32 | AAV, 3-P IOL in sulcus |
| 68 | Female | OD | OD | CF 2 mt | Chopping | 20/200 | Aphakia, SFIOL |
CF: Counting fingers, AAV: Automated anterior vitrectomy, IOL: Intraocular lens, 3-P IOL: 3-piece IOL, SFIOL: Scleral fixated IOL, PCR: Posterior capsular rupture, BCVA: Best-corrected visual acuity, OU: Both eyes, OD: Right eye, OS: Left eye
Comparison of outcomes between our study and previously published studies
| Authors | Technique | Total number of eyes in series | PCR rate % (eyes) | Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Osher | Low power, low infusion, slow-motion phaco (+hydrodissection) | 31 | 26 (8) | Vitreous loss 13% (4/31) |
| Vasavada and Singh[ | Delineation | 25 | 36 (9) | |
| Lee and Lee[ | Delineation | 25 | 8 (2) | RD 7% (2/28) |
| Vasavada and Raj[ | Inside out delineation | 25 | 8 (2) | Dropped nucleus 4% (1/25) |
| Haripriya | Bimanual microphaco | 8 | 12.5 (1) | |
| Das | Chip and flip for soft cataracts. Stop and chop for hard cataracts | 81 | 31 (25) | Dropped nucleus 3% (2/81) |
| Malhotra | V or lambda sculpting, Viscodissection of epinucleus | 80 | 7.5 (6) | Aphakia - 1.25% (1/80) |
| Siatiri and Moghimi[ | Hydrodissection-free phacoemulsification technique' | 38 | 0 | |
| Salahuddin[ | Inverse horseshoe technique | 28 | 7.1 | Two patients left with plaque |
| Current study | Phacoemulsification without hydroprocedure | 115 | 7.82 (9) | 1 aphakia, 1 fragment drop |
PCR: Posterior capsular rupture, IOL: Intraocular lens, RD: Retinal detachment