June 2017
Volume 58, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2017
Comparison of phacoemulsification energy used in Femtosecond Laser Assisted Cataract Surgery (FLACS) and conventional phacoemulsification
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Sharon Ong
    University of Maryland School of Medicine, Potomac, Maryland, United States
  • Syed Karim
    University of Maryland School of Medicine, Potomac, Maryland, United States
  • Luke Chang
    University of Maryland School of Medicine, Potomac, Maryland, United States
  • Arturo Betancourt
    Baltimore Washington Eye Center, Glen Burnie, Maryland, United States
  • Brad Spagnolo
    Baltimore Washington Eye Center, Glen Burnie, Maryland, United States
  • Andrew Hammer
    Baltimore Washington Eye Center, Glen Burnie, Maryland, United States
  • Osamah Saeedi
    University of Maryland School of Medicine, Potomac, Maryland, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Sharon Ong, None; Syed Karim, None; Luke Chang, None; Arturo Betancourt, None; Brad Spagnolo, None; Andrew Hammer, None; Osamah Saeedi, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2017, Vol.58, 1817. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to Subscribers Only
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Sharon Ong, Syed Karim, Luke Chang, Arturo Betancourt, Brad Spagnolo, Andrew Hammer, Osamah Saeedi; Comparison of phacoemulsification energy used in Femtosecond Laser Assisted Cataract Surgery (FLACS) and conventional phacoemulsification. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2017;58(8):1817.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Femtosecond laser assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) is rapidly gaining popularity due to its precision and performance of lens fragmentation, ideally allowing for more efficient removal of cataracts. This study’s purpose is to investigate the differences in phacoemulsification energy used in FLACS compared with conventional phacoemulsification.

Methods : We conducted a retrospective study in a large ophthalmology private practice on all uncomplicated cataract surgeries performed with phacoemulsification from November 2013 to December 2015. Three surgeons with varying levels of experience performed both FLACS and conventional phacoemulsification. Demographic and intraoperative variables collected prospectively at the time of surgery include surgeon, phaco energy as measured by cumulative dissipated energy (CDE), age, operative eye, procedure performed, intraocular lens (IOL) lens power and type, patient allergies, past medical history, and ASA rating. Bivariate analysis was performed with CDE as a dependent variable. Surgeon experience, type of surgery, and age were independent variables. Multivariable statistical analysis was subsequently performed on variables that were statistically significant.

Results : 1885 surgeries were reviewed. 629 (33.4%) were FLACS cases, and 1252 (66.4%) were conventional phacoemulsification procedures. FLACS procedures had lower CDE as compared to conventional phacoemulsification (13.79 ±9.50 vs 15.39±20.70; p=0.024). Patients who had FLACS were notably younger than those undergoing conventional phacoemulsification—69.86 ±7.84 and 71.88 ±23.71, respectively (P=0.038). Lower age and greater surgeon experience were associated with lower CDE (p= 0.001, p= 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that, when age and surgeon were accounted for, there was no association between the type of surgery performed and phacoemulsification energy as determined by CDE (Table 1).

Conclusions : In a large private practice setting with multiple surgeons, FLACS use was not associated with a difference in phacoemulsification energy. Individual surgeons may experience less phacoemulsification energy with FLACS, potentially related to surgical technique.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2017 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Baltimore, MD, May 7-11, 2017.

 

Table 1. Multivariable regression for CDE

Table 1. Multivariable regression for CDE

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×