June 2020
Volume 61, Issue 7
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2020
Long term intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering effect of Femtosecond Laser Assisted Cataract Surgery (FLACS) versus conventional phacoemulsification (PE)
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Yasaman Ataei
    University of Maryland, School of Medicine (UMB), Baltimore, Maryland, United States
  • Erin Ong
    University of Maryland, School of Medicine (UMB), Baltimore, 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
    Visionary Eye Doctors, Rockville, Maryland, United States
  • Osamah Saeedi
    University of Maryland, School of Medicine (UMB), Baltimore, Maryland, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Yasaman Ataei, None; Erin Ong, None; Arturo Betancourt, None; Brad Spagnolo, None; Andrew Hammer, None; Osamah Saeedi, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  none
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2020, Vol.61, 974. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Yasaman Ataei, Erin Ong, Arturo Betancourt, Brad Spagnolo, Andrew Hammer, Osamah Saeedi; Long term intraocular pressure (IOP) lowering effect of Femtosecond Laser Assisted Cataract Surgery (FLACS) versus conventional phacoemulsification (PE). Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2020;61(7):974.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Femtosecond Laser Assisted Cataract Surgery (FLACS) is a new technology that reduces the amount of ultrasound energy used and allows for a more efficient cataract extraction. The IOP reduction effect of conventional phacoemulsification (PE) is known and a hypothesized cause is ultrasound energy. However, this effect is not established in FLACS. The purpose of our study is to compare the IOP-lowering effect of FLACS versus conventional PE.

Methods : We conducted a retrospective cohort study on 400 cataract surgeries between February 2014 and November 2015 in a local private practice and ophthalmology ambulatory surgical center. Surgeries were performed by three surgeons. For patients with surgery done on both eyes, information on both eyes were included in the analysis. Demographic information was collected and pre-operative pressure was calculated averaging 1-3 IOP measurements prior to the surgery. Post-operative IOP were measured at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years and 3 years. Patients without pre-operative IOP, patients with diagnosis of glaucoma and surgeries complicated by vitrectomy were excluded. IOP reduction was compared at each time point using a paired t-test and data was analyzed longitudinally using model based estimation. SAS University 9.4 was used for data analysis.

Results : 338 eyes met the inclusion criteria. The mean pre-operative IOP in eyes undergoing FLACS versus conventional PE was very similar (p=0.78). There was no statistically significant difference in IOP reduction between conventional PE and FLACS at any of the follow-up times (Table 2). Matching subjects for age did not yield different results. Longitudinal analysis showed no statistically significant difference in IOP reduction at last follow-up between conventional PE versus FLACS (p= 0.98). However, we found a strong non-linear relationship between IOP reduction and the follow-up time (p<0.001). Additionally, higher pre-operative pressure was correlated with a bigger reduction in post-operative IOP at all time points (p<0.0001).

Conclusions : In our sample, there was no long term difference between FLACS and conventional PE in regards to lowering IOP, which could be due to the difference in ultrasound energy being too small between these two modalities. However, there is a strong non-linear relationship between IOP reduction and follow-up time.

This is a 2020 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.

 

×
×

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.

×