Cargando…
FLUIDIC PERFORMANCE OF A DUAL-ACTION VITRECTOMY PROBE COMPARED WITH A SINGLE-ACTION PROBE
To assess flow rates, nearfield effects, and traction of a dual-cutting 20,000 cpm vitrectomy probe (HYPERVIT, Alcon) versus a single-cutting 10,000 cpm probe (Advanced ULTRAVIT, Alcon). METHODS: Flow rates were evaluated for 25+ and 27+ gauge probes using balanced salt solution or porcine cadaver v...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Retina
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9584060/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35868025 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/IAE.0000000000003573 |
_version_ | 1784813195800608768 |
---|---|
author | Steel, David H. Charles, Martin Zhu, Ying Tambat, Sonalee Irannejad, A. Mani Charles, Steve |
author_facet | Steel, David H. Charles, Martin Zhu, Ying Tambat, Sonalee Irannejad, A. Mani Charles, Steve |
author_sort | Steel, David H. |
collection | PubMed |
description | To assess flow rates, nearfield effects, and traction of a dual-cutting 20,000 cpm vitrectomy probe (HYPERVIT, Alcon) versus a single-cutting 10,000 cpm probe (Advanced ULTRAVIT, Alcon). METHODS: Flow rates were evaluated for 25+ and 27+ gauge probes using balanced salt solution or porcine cadaver vitreous (biased open, 50/50, and biased closed duty cycles). Probes were suspended in an open beaker, and flow rates were calculated using a precision balance. Nearfield effects and flow pulsatility were assessed using a validated simulation model based on experimental microparticle image velocimetry. Traction was assessed by attaching vitreous to a cantilever beam and measuring the deflection of the beam. RESULTS: For HYPERVIT probes, aqueous flow rates were similar across all cutting rates. Vitreous flow rates increased with increasing cutting rates. At maximum cutting rates, aqueous flow was 62%–67% greater (25+) and 63% greater (27+) with HYPERVIT versus Advanced ULTRAVIT (P < 0.05); vitreous flow was 44%–47% greater (25+) and 26%–32% greater (27+) with HYPERVIT versus Advanced ULTRAVIT (P < 0.05). Nearfield effects were reduced, and peak traction forces were significantly lower for HYPERVIT versus Advanced ULTRAVIT (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Significantly greater aspiration flow, reduced nearfield effects, and reduced traction were observed with dual-action versus single-action probes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9584060 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Retina |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95840602022-10-27 FLUIDIC PERFORMANCE OF A DUAL-ACTION VITRECTOMY PROBE COMPARED WITH A SINGLE-ACTION PROBE Steel, David H. Charles, Martin Zhu, Ying Tambat, Sonalee Irannejad, A. Mani Charles, Steve Retina Original Study To assess flow rates, nearfield effects, and traction of a dual-cutting 20,000 cpm vitrectomy probe (HYPERVIT, Alcon) versus a single-cutting 10,000 cpm probe (Advanced ULTRAVIT, Alcon). METHODS: Flow rates were evaluated for 25+ and 27+ gauge probes using balanced salt solution or porcine cadaver vitreous (biased open, 50/50, and biased closed duty cycles). Probes were suspended in an open beaker, and flow rates were calculated using a precision balance. Nearfield effects and flow pulsatility were assessed using a validated simulation model based on experimental microparticle image velocimetry. Traction was assessed by attaching vitreous to a cantilever beam and measuring the deflection of the beam. RESULTS: For HYPERVIT probes, aqueous flow rates were similar across all cutting rates. Vitreous flow rates increased with increasing cutting rates. At maximum cutting rates, aqueous flow was 62%–67% greater (25+) and 63% greater (27+) with HYPERVIT versus Advanced ULTRAVIT (P < 0.05); vitreous flow was 44%–47% greater (25+) and 26%–32% greater (27+) with HYPERVIT versus Advanced ULTRAVIT (P < 0.05). Nearfield effects were reduced, and peak traction forces were significantly lower for HYPERVIT versus Advanced ULTRAVIT (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Significantly greater aspiration flow, reduced nearfield effects, and reduced traction were observed with dual-action versus single-action probes. Retina 2022-11 2022-07-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9584060/ /pubmed/35868025 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/IAE.0000000000003573 Text en Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Opthalmic Communications Society, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | Original Study Steel, David H. Charles, Martin Zhu, Ying Tambat, Sonalee Irannejad, A. Mani Charles, Steve FLUIDIC PERFORMANCE OF A DUAL-ACTION VITRECTOMY PROBE COMPARED WITH A SINGLE-ACTION PROBE |
title | FLUIDIC PERFORMANCE OF A DUAL-ACTION VITRECTOMY PROBE COMPARED WITH A SINGLE-ACTION PROBE |
title_full | FLUIDIC PERFORMANCE OF A DUAL-ACTION VITRECTOMY PROBE COMPARED WITH A SINGLE-ACTION PROBE |
title_fullStr | FLUIDIC PERFORMANCE OF A DUAL-ACTION VITRECTOMY PROBE COMPARED WITH A SINGLE-ACTION PROBE |
title_full_unstemmed | FLUIDIC PERFORMANCE OF A DUAL-ACTION VITRECTOMY PROBE COMPARED WITH A SINGLE-ACTION PROBE |
title_short | FLUIDIC PERFORMANCE OF A DUAL-ACTION VITRECTOMY PROBE COMPARED WITH A SINGLE-ACTION PROBE |
title_sort | fluidic performance of a dual-action vitrectomy probe compared with a single-action probe |
topic | Original Study |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9584060/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35868025 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/IAE.0000000000003573 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT steeldavidh fluidicperformanceofadualactionvitrectomyprobecomparedwithasingleactionprobe AT charlesmartin fluidicperformanceofadualactionvitrectomyprobecomparedwithasingleactionprobe AT zhuying fluidicperformanceofadualactionvitrectomyprobecomparedwithasingleactionprobe AT tambatsonalee fluidicperformanceofadualactionvitrectomyprobecomparedwithasingleactionprobe AT irannejadamani fluidicperformanceofadualactionvitrectomyprobecomparedwithasingleactionprobe AT charlessteve fluidicperformanceofadualactionvitrectomyprobecomparedwithasingleactionprobe |