Cargando…

Ultrasound energy consumption and macular changes with manual and femtolaser‐assisted high‐fluidics cataract surgery: a prospective randomized comparison

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to compare ultrasound (US) consumption and central macular thickness (CMT) and volume changes with manual and femtosecond laser (FSL)‐assisted cataract nucleus workup. METHODS: Sixty patients scheduled for immediate sequential bilateral surgery underwent a prosp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Menapace, Rupert, Schartmüller, Daniel, Röggla, Veronika, Reiter, Gregor S., Leydolt, Christina, Schwarzenbacher, Luca
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290836/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34543523
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aos.14983
_version_ 1784749002784243712
author Menapace, Rupert
Schartmüller, Daniel
Röggla, Veronika
Reiter, Gregor S.
Leydolt, Christina
Schwarzenbacher, Luca
author_facet Menapace, Rupert
Schartmüller, Daniel
Röggla, Veronika
Reiter, Gregor S.
Leydolt, Christina
Schwarzenbacher, Luca
author_sort Menapace, Rupert
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to compare ultrasound (US) consumption and central macular thickness (CMT) and volume changes with manual and femtosecond laser (FSL)‐assisted cataract nucleus workup. METHODS: Sixty patients scheduled for immediate sequential bilateral surgery underwent a prospective randomized intraindividual comparison of nucleus sector fragmentation performed manually in one eye and with low‐energy FSL assistance in the partner eye, followed by high‐fluidics phacoaspiration with a maximum US power of 30%. Ultrasound (US) energy consumption and macular thickness and volume were compared as measured by intraoperative effective phacoemulsification time (EPT) and high‐resolution spectral domain optical coherence tomography pre‐ and 1 week, 3 weeks and 6 weeks postoperatively. Results are presented as means ± SD or medians [min; max]. RESULTS: Fifty‐two patients completed the full follow‐up. For the manual and FSL‐assisted groups, nuclear hardness was almost identical with a mean LOCS III grade of 2.44 ± 1.08 and 2.50 ± 1.00 (p = 0.371). Median EPT was 1.40 [0.2; 8.3] and 1.25 [0.2; 9.4] seconds. Median preoperative CMT was 276.50 [263.25; 289.75] µm and 276.00 [262.00; 290.00] µm. Median postoperative CMT was 278.00 [260.50; 288.00] versus 275.50 [264.00; 290.50] µm at 1 week, 279.50 [266.75; 292.25] versus 280.00 [266.50; 294.50] µm at 3 weeks and 280.50 [268.00, 293.75] versus 279.50 [264.75; 295.25] µm at 6 weeks. Differences in CMT and total macular volume between the groups were not statistically significant at any point in time. CONCLUSION: Femtosecond laser (FSL) prefragmentation of the nucleus into six sectors did not reduce US energy consumption compared with manual splitting of the nucleus into four quadrants in this particular surgical setting. Sectorial FSL‐prechopping with the low‐energy FSL used had no additional impact on postoperative macular thickness and volume.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9290836
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92908362022-07-20 Ultrasound energy consumption and macular changes with manual and femtolaser‐assisted high‐fluidics cataract surgery: a prospective randomized comparison Menapace, Rupert Schartmüller, Daniel Röggla, Veronika Reiter, Gregor S. Leydolt, Christina Schwarzenbacher, Luca Acta Ophthalmol Original Articles PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to compare ultrasound (US) consumption and central macular thickness (CMT) and volume changes with manual and femtosecond laser (FSL)‐assisted cataract nucleus workup. METHODS: Sixty patients scheduled for immediate sequential bilateral surgery underwent a prospective randomized intraindividual comparison of nucleus sector fragmentation performed manually in one eye and with low‐energy FSL assistance in the partner eye, followed by high‐fluidics phacoaspiration with a maximum US power of 30%. Ultrasound (US) energy consumption and macular thickness and volume were compared as measured by intraoperative effective phacoemulsification time (EPT) and high‐resolution spectral domain optical coherence tomography pre‐ and 1 week, 3 weeks and 6 weeks postoperatively. Results are presented as means ± SD or medians [min; max]. RESULTS: Fifty‐two patients completed the full follow‐up. For the manual and FSL‐assisted groups, nuclear hardness was almost identical with a mean LOCS III grade of 2.44 ± 1.08 and 2.50 ± 1.00 (p = 0.371). Median EPT was 1.40 [0.2; 8.3] and 1.25 [0.2; 9.4] seconds. Median preoperative CMT was 276.50 [263.25; 289.75] µm and 276.00 [262.00; 290.00] µm. Median postoperative CMT was 278.00 [260.50; 288.00] versus 275.50 [264.00; 290.50] µm at 1 week, 279.50 [266.75; 292.25] versus 280.00 [266.50; 294.50] µm at 3 weeks and 280.50 [268.00, 293.75] versus 279.50 [264.75; 295.25] µm at 6 weeks. Differences in CMT and total macular volume between the groups were not statistically significant at any point in time. CONCLUSION: Femtosecond laser (FSL) prefragmentation of the nucleus into six sectors did not reduce US energy consumption compared with manual splitting of the nucleus into four quadrants in this particular surgical setting. Sectorial FSL‐prechopping with the low‐energy FSL used had no additional impact on postoperative macular thickness and volume. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-09-20 2022-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9290836/ /pubmed/34543523 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aos.14983 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Acta Ophthalmologica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Menapace, Rupert
Schartmüller, Daniel
Röggla, Veronika
Reiter, Gregor S.
Leydolt, Christina
Schwarzenbacher, Luca
Ultrasound energy consumption and macular changes with manual and femtolaser‐assisted high‐fluidics cataract surgery: a prospective randomized comparison
title Ultrasound energy consumption and macular changes with manual and femtolaser‐assisted high‐fluidics cataract surgery: a prospective randomized comparison
title_full Ultrasound energy consumption and macular changes with manual and femtolaser‐assisted high‐fluidics cataract surgery: a prospective randomized comparison
title_fullStr Ultrasound energy consumption and macular changes with manual and femtolaser‐assisted high‐fluidics cataract surgery: a prospective randomized comparison
title_full_unstemmed Ultrasound energy consumption and macular changes with manual and femtolaser‐assisted high‐fluidics cataract surgery: a prospective randomized comparison
title_short Ultrasound energy consumption and macular changes with manual and femtolaser‐assisted high‐fluidics cataract surgery: a prospective randomized comparison
title_sort ultrasound energy consumption and macular changes with manual and femtolaser‐assisted high‐fluidics cataract surgery: a prospective randomized comparison
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290836/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34543523
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aos.14983
work_keys_str_mv AT menapacerupert ultrasoundenergyconsumptionandmacularchangeswithmanualandfemtolaserassistedhighfluidicscataractsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcomparison
AT schartmullerdaniel ultrasoundenergyconsumptionandmacularchangeswithmanualandfemtolaserassistedhighfluidicscataractsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcomparison
AT rogglaveronika ultrasoundenergyconsumptionandmacularchangeswithmanualandfemtolaserassistedhighfluidicscataractsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcomparison
AT reitergregors ultrasoundenergyconsumptionandmacularchangeswithmanualandfemtolaserassistedhighfluidicscataractsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcomparison
AT leydoltchristina ultrasoundenergyconsumptionandmacularchangeswithmanualandfemtolaserassistedhighfluidicscataractsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcomparison
AT schwarzenbacherluca ultrasoundenergyconsumptionandmacularchangeswithmanualandfemtolaserassistedhighfluidicscataractsurgeryaprospectiverandomizedcomparison