Cargando…

Comparison of cumulative dispersed energy between conventional phacoemulsification and femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery with two different lens fragmentation patterns

The purpose of the study is to compare the total ultrasound power used between eyes undergoing different lens fragmentation patterns of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) and conventional phacoemulsification surgery (CPS). A total of 506 patient eyes underwent preoperative grading o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lin, Hung-Yuan, Kao, Shu-Ting, Chuang, Ya-Jung, Chen, Shuan, Lin, Pi-Jung
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer London 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8918128/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33876322
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10103-021-03321-1
Descripción
Sumario:The purpose of the study is to compare the total ultrasound power used between eyes undergoing different lens fragmentation patterns of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) and conventional phacoemulsification surgery (CPS). A total of 506 patient eyes underwent preoperative grading of lens opacity using the Lens Opacity Classification System III (LOCSIII). The eyes were divided into two subgroups: subgroup 1 had a LOCSIII grade of 1–3, and subgroup 2 had a LOCSIII grade of 4–6. The eyes underwent FLACS (LenSx) for clear corneal wound, capsulotomy, and lens fragmentation. Either a grid pattern or radial pattern was used for lens fragmentation. The eyes received one of the following three treatments: (1) CPS without femtosecond laser assistant, (2) FLACS with a grid pattern (FGP) lens fragment, or (3) FLACS with a quadrant pattern (FQP) lens fragment. The mean cumulative dispersed energy (CDE) for each subgroup and treatment was evaluated. The mean CDE was lower in the two FLACS groups (1.21±1.91 in FGP and 1.22±1.92 in FQP) than that in the CPG group (2.67±2.84). In subgroup 1, CDE was higher in the CPG group (1.54±1.18) as compared with the FLACS groups (0.16±0.31 in FGP and 0.74±1.17 in FQP; P<0.001). In subgroup 2, CDE was higher in the CPG (6.47±3.46) as compared with the FLACS groups (2.74±2.21 in FGP and 5.34±2.17 in FQP; P<0.001). CDE was lower in the two FLACS groups than that in the CPS group, and CDE was the lowest with FGP in both subgroups 1 and 2.