The Clinical Outcomes of Manual Continuous Curvilinear Capsulorhexis and Precision Pulse Capsulotomy

Purpose: To compare the safety and consistency of manual capsulorhexis and precision pulse capsulotomy performed using pulsed energy during bilateral cataract surgery and to explore the differences in clinical outcomes.Methods: A total of 101 patients with bilateral cataracts were selected. Precision pulse capsulotomy was performed on one eye and manual continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis on the other. The independent-samples t-test was used to compare the duration of continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis, incisional size and roundness, complications such as radial tears, the cumulative dissipated energy, the visual acuity after surgery, and the corneal epithelial cell count.Results: There was no significant difference in the capsulorhexis time between the pulse energy and manual groups. The extent of capsulorhexis was significantly smaller and the circularity of capsulorhexis was higher in the former group. Complications occurred in two manual capsulorhexis patients but in no pulse energy capsulotomy patient. There was no significant between- group difference in any of postoperative visual acuity, best-corrected visual acuity, or the corneal endothelial cell count.Conclusions: During bilateral cataract surgery on the same patients, precision capsulotomy using pulse energy afforded smaller and more circular capsulorhexis and fewer complications than did manual capsulorhexis. However, there was no significant between- group difference in the postoperative clinical outcomes.