Cargando…
Optimizing Tip Diameter in Phacoemulsification of Varying Lens Sizes: An in vitro Study
PURPOSE: We assessed the effect of two lens cube sizes, three tip sizes, and two ultrasound (US) approaches on phacoemulsification efficiency and chatter. METHODS: After porcine lens nuclei were soaked in formalin, we divided them into cubes measuring 2.0 mm or 3.0 mm. We collected efficiency and ch...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8607188/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34819719 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S333903 |
_version_ | 1784602510274592768 |
---|---|
author | Ramshekar, Aniket Heczko, Joshua Bernhisel, Ashlie Barlow, William Zaugg, Brian Olson, Randall Pettey, Jeff |
author_facet | Ramshekar, Aniket Heczko, Joshua Bernhisel, Ashlie Barlow, William Zaugg, Brian Olson, Randall Pettey, Jeff |
author_sort | Ramshekar, Aniket |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: We assessed the effect of two lens cube sizes, three tip sizes, and two ultrasound (US) approaches on phacoemulsification efficiency and chatter. METHODS: After porcine lens nuclei were soaked in formalin, we divided them into cubes measuring 2.0 mm or 3.0 mm. We collected efficiency and chatter data for 30-degree bent 19 G, 20 G, and 21 G tips with a continuous torsional US system; and for straight 19 G, 20 G, and 21 G tips with a micropulse longitudinal US system. RESULTS: The average time needed for removal was always higher for the 3.0 mm lens cube than for the 2.0 mm lens cube. Statistically significant differences were observed between the 19 G and 21 G tips with micropulse longitudinal US using a 2.0 mm cube and a 3.0 mm cube, and with continuous transversal US using a 2.0 mm lens cube and a 3.0 mm cube. We did not observe significant differences between 19 G and 20 G tips with either cube size in either US system. However, we noted identical trends for both cube sizes with both US approaches; 19 G tips performed better than 20 G and 21 G tips. CONCLUSION: Regardless of the lens size, 19 G needles were the most efficient, and had both the fewest outliers and the smallest standard deviations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8607188 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Dove |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86071882021-11-23 Optimizing Tip Diameter in Phacoemulsification of Varying Lens Sizes: An in vitro Study Ramshekar, Aniket Heczko, Joshua Bernhisel, Ashlie Barlow, William Zaugg, Brian Olson, Randall Pettey, Jeff Clin Ophthalmol Original Research PURPOSE: We assessed the effect of two lens cube sizes, three tip sizes, and two ultrasound (US) approaches on phacoemulsification efficiency and chatter. METHODS: After porcine lens nuclei were soaked in formalin, we divided them into cubes measuring 2.0 mm or 3.0 mm. We collected efficiency and chatter data for 30-degree bent 19 G, 20 G, and 21 G tips with a continuous torsional US system; and for straight 19 G, 20 G, and 21 G tips with a micropulse longitudinal US system. RESULTS: The average time needed for removal was always higher for the 3.0 mm lens cube than for the 2.0 mm lens cube. Statistically significant differences were observed between the 19 G and 21 G tips with micropulse longitudinal US using a 2.0 mm cube and a 3.0 mm cube, and with continuous transversal US using a 2.0 mm lens cube and a 3.0 mm cube. We did not observe significant differences between 19 G and 20 G tips with either cube size in either US system. However, we noted identical trends for both cube sizes with both US approaches; 19 G tips performed better than 20 G and 21 G tips. CONCLUSION: Regardless of the lens size, 19 G needles were the most efficient, and had both the fewest outliers and the smallest standard deviations. Dove 2021-11-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8607188/ /pubmed/34819719 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S333903 Text en © 2021 Ramshekar et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Ramshekar, Aniket Heczko, Joshua Bernhisel, Ashlie Barlow, William Zaugg, Brian Olson, Randall Pettey, Jeff Optimizing Tip Diameter in Phacoemulsification of Varying Lens Sizes: An in vitro Study |
title | Optimizing Tip Diameter in Phacoemulsification of Varying Lens Sizes: An in vitro Study |
title_full | Optimizing Tip Diameter in Phacoemulsification of Varying Lens Sizes: An in vitro Study |
title_fullStr | Optimizing Tip Diameter in Phacoemulsification of Varying Lens Sizes: An in vitro Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Optimizing Tip Diameter in Phacoemulsification of Varying Lens Sizes: An in vitro Study |
title_short | Optimizing Tip Diameter in Phacoemulsification of Varying Lens Sizes: An in vitro Study |
title_sort | optimizing tip diameter in phacoemulsification of varying lens sizes: an in vitro study |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8607188/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34819719 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S333903 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ramshekaraniket optimizingtipdiameterinphacoemulsificationofvaryinglenssizesaninvitrostudy AT heczkojoshua optimizingtipdiameterinphacoemulsificationofvaryinglenssizesaninvitrostudy AT bernhiselashlie optimizingtipdiameterinphacoemulsificationofvaryinglenssizesaninvitrostudy AT barlowwilliam optimizingtipdiameterinphacoemulsificationofvaryinglenssizesaninvitrostudy AT zauggbrian optimizingtipdiameterinphacoemulsificationofvaryinglenssizesaninvitrostudy AT olsonrandall optimizingtipdiameterinphacoemulsificationofvaryinglenssizesaninvitrostudy AT petteyjeff optimizingtipdiameterinphacoemulsificationofvaryinglenssizesaninvitrostudy |