May 2006
Volume 47, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2006
Conventional Phaco versus Microincision Cataract Surgery (MICS)
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • R.M. Torres
    CLINICA OFTALMOLOGICA GRAN CANARIA, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain
    Ocular Surface & Immunology,
  • A. Manrique–de–Lara
    CLINICA OFTALMOLOGICA GRAN CANARIA, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain
  • S. Guillen–Molina
    CLINICA OFTALMOLOGICA GRAN CANARIA, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain
  • P. Correas
    CLINICA OFTALMOLOGICA GRAN CANARIA, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  R.M. Torres, None; A. Manrique–de–Lara, None; S. Guillen–Molina, None; P. Correas, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2006, Vol.47, 636. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      R.M. Torres, A. Manrique–de–Lara, S. Guillen–Molina, P. Correas; Conventional Phaco versus Microincision Cataract Surgery (MICS) . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2006;47(13):636.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To evaluate corneal response and anterior chamber inflammation after conventional coaxial phaco or MICS.

Methods: : Twenty five consecutive patients (fifty eyes) scheduled for routine cataract surgery were selected to perform this prospective clinical study. One eye was operated by conventional phaco (group 1) and the other eye (from the same patient) was operated by MICS (group 2) after special informed consent was accepted. One surgeon performs all the procedures and phacoemulsification time (time during ultrasound energy was applied) and power (percentage of phaco energy) were assessed for each procedure. The following parameters were evaluated preoperatively and at different postoperative time–points to compare both surgical procedures. Cells in the anterior chamber and corneal edema were clinically evaluated at day 0, 1 and 7. Corneal thickness was measured by ultrasound pachymetry at day 0, 7, 30 and 90. Corneal endothelial cells density was measured by non contact specular microscopy at day 0, 1, 7, 30 and 90.

Results: : Phacoemulsification time (seconds): group 1: 0.84; group: 0.47. Phacoemulsification power (%): group 1: 21.9; group 2: 12.7. Clinically, anterior chamber inflammation and corneal edema shows no difference between conventional phaco and MICS. The preoperatively mean central corneal thickness (µm) was 530 (SD 43) in group 1 and 533 (SD 44) in group 2, with no difference 90 days post–surgery (group 1: 532; group 2: 534). Preoperatively the mean endothelial cell/mm2 count was in group 1: 2458.6 (SD 429.6); group 2: 2347.7 (SD 385.0). Ninety day after surgery the mean endothelial cell/mm2 count was in group 1: 2243.6 (SD 362.7); group 2: 2154.8 (SD 365.7). Both procedures show loss of corneal endothelial cells (conventional phaco: 8.7% and MICS 8.2%) but without statistical difference.

Conclusions: : MICS needs less ultrasound energy and time than conventional phaco, although corneal response and anterior chamber inflammation shows no clinical difference three months after surgery.

Keywords: cornea: endothelium • cataract • anterior chamber 
×
×

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.

×