Cumulative Dissipated Energy (CDE) in Three Phaco-Fragmentation Techniques for Dense Cataract Removal.

IF 1.8 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY Clinical ophthalmology Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.2147/OPTH.S407705
Erika Fernández-Muñoz, Yolanda Chávez-Romero, Ricardo Rivero-Gómez, Rebeca Aridjis, Roberto Gonzalez-Salinas
{"title":"Cumulative Dissipated Energy (CDE) in Three Phaco-Fragmentation Techniques for Dense Cataract Removal.","authors":"Erika Fernández-Muñoz,&nbsp;Yolanda Chávez-Romero,&nbsp;Ricardo Rivero-Gómez,&nbsp;Rebeca Aridjis,&nbsp;Roberto Gonzalez-Salinas","doi":"10.2147/OPTH.S407705","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine the energy expenditure in phacoemulsification surgery expressed as cumulative dissipated energy (CDE) among the divide and conquer, ultrachopper-assisted divide and conquer, and phaco-chop techniques for dense cataract removal.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>The clinical data were obtained from the medical charts of dense cataracts patients undergoing routine phacoemulsification employing any of three phaco-fragmentation techniques, including divide and conquer using the Kelman 0.9 mm tip, the ultrachopper tip, and the phaco-chop technique using the Kelman 0.9 mm tip. Cumulated dissipated energy (CDE), longitudinal ultrasound time (UST), and endothelial cell loss were compared among groups at the one-month postoperative.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surgeries from 90 eyes were analyzed, among whom the conventional divide-and-conquer technique group included 30 patients, 32 in the ultrachopper group, and 28 in the phaco-chop technique group. The average CDE in the conventional divide and conquer group was 44.52 ± 23.00, the ultrachopper technique was 43.27 ± 23.18, and 20.11 ± 11.06 in the phaco-chop group. Phaco-fragmentation chop demonstrated significantly lower CDE than the other techniques (p= <0.0001). The phaco-chop technique showed statistically significantly lower CDE when compared to the other two groups (p=<0.0001) with 93.96 ± 39.71 seconds. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative endothelial cell density between groups (p=0.4916).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of the phaco-chop technique in hard cataract phacoemulsification represents a lower energy expenditure than divide and conquer and ultrachopper techniques; nevertheless, no differences regarding endothelial density loss were evidenced.</p>","PeriodicalId":10442,"journal":{"name":"Clinical ophthalmology","volume":"17 ","pages":"2405-2412"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f3/a0/opth-17-2405.PMC10440113.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S407705","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the energy expenditure in phacoemulsification surgery expressed as cumulative dissipated energy (CDE) among the divide and conquer, ultrachopper-assisted divide and conquer, and phaco-chop techniques for dense cataract removal.

Patients and methods: The clinical data were obtained from the medical charts of dense cataracts patients undergoing routine phacoemulsification employing any of three phaco-fragmentation techniques, including divide and conquer using the Kelman 0.9 mm tip, the ultrachopper tip, and the phaco-chop technique using the Kelman 0.9 mm tip. Cumulated dissipated energy (CDE), longitudinal ultrasound time (UST), and endothelial cell loss were compared among groups at the one-month postoperative.

Results: Surgeries from 90 eyes were analyzed, among whom the conventional divide-and-conquer technique group included 30 patients, 32 in the ultrachopper group, and 28 in the phaco-chop technique group. The average CDE in the conventional divide and conquer group was 44.52 ± 23.00, the ultrachopper technique was 43.27 ± 23.18, and 20.11 ± 11.06 in the phaco-chop group. Phaco-fragmentation chop demonstrated significantly lower CDE than the other techniques (p= <0.0001). The phaco-chop technique showed statistically significantly lower CDE when compared to the other two groups (p=<0.0001) with 93.96 ± 39.71 seconds. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative endothelial cell density between groups (p=0.4916).

Conclusion: The use of the phaco-chop technique in hard cataract phacoemulsification represents a lower energy expenditure than divide and conquer and ultrachopper techniques; nevertheless, no differences regarding endothelial density loss were evidenced.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
累积耗散能量(CDE)在三种晶状体碎裂技术中的应用。
目的:探讨以累加耗散能量(CDE)表示的超声乳化手术能量消耗在分治、超直升机辅助分治和超声切割技术中对致密性白内障摘除的影响。患者和方法:临床资料来自于接受常规超声乳化术的致密性白内障患者的病历,这些患者采用三种超声破碎技术中的任何一种,包括使用Kelman 0.9 mm尖端的分治技术、超直升机尖端和使用Kelman 0.9 mm尖端的超声切割技术。比较各组术后1个月的累积耗散能(CDE)、纵向超声时间(UST)和内皮细胞损失。结果:对90只眼的手术进行分析,其中常规分治法组30例,超斩刀组32例,超斩刀组28例。常规分治组平均CDE为44.52±23.00,超斩术组平均CDE为43.27±23.18,斩术组平均CDE为20.11±11.06。结论:在硬性白内障超声乳化术中,使用phaco-chop技术比分治法和超直升机技术能耗更低;然而,内皮密度损失方面没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical ophthalmology
Clinical ophthalmology OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.10%
发文量
499
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Optimal Duration of Monocular Occlusion to Eliminate Fusion Effect in Intermittent Exotropia Time Savings Using a Digital Workflow versus a Conventional for Intraocular Lens Implantation in a Corporate Chain Hospital Setting The Prevalence and Severity of Acquired Blepharoptosis in US Eye Care Clinic Patients and Their Receptivity to Treatment Fungal Keratitis: Diagnosis, Management, and Recent Advances Evaluation of Foveal Avascular Zone After Strabismic and Anisometropic Amblyopia Therapy in Saudi Children Using Optic Coherence Tomography Angiography: A Cohort Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1