Final incision size after implantation of a hydrophobic acrylic aspheric intraocular lens: New motorized injector versus standard manual injector

Allen, David W.; Habib, Maged; Steel, David

doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.08.038

Cited by 27 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The mean enlargement in incision size after cortical aspiration to after IOL implantation in their study was 0.046 mm, which is a little less than ours (0.12 mm). We also compared the difference in final incision sizes with D cartridge and Autosert and found lesser incision enlargement with Autosert, which was statistically significant; results similar to those reported by Allen et al 8 Forcing implantation of IOL through incision of smaller than adequate size may lead to corneal damage manifesting as descemet's tears, irregularities, distortions, and improper wound healing. The ideal incision size for use of D cartridge has been observed by Espiritu and Bernardo 11 to be 2.3 mm with woundassisted implantation of IOL.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…However an ideal injector system still eludes the medical fraternity. With available reports on Autosert, 8 we tried to find the IOL safety, changes in incision size after the IOL insertion, and wound integrity on ASOCT comparing manual and motorized injector systems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are safety reports available with the use of Autosert for IOL implantation. 8 It is easy to use and was found to cause less incision enlargement during IOL implantation by Allen et al 8 We compared this device with the manual Monarch injector, provided by the same manufacturer, with respect to IOL safety, incision size, and wound integrity using Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography (ASOCT; Visante; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Dublin, CA, USA).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of new motorized injector vs manual injector for implantation of foldable intraocular lenses on wound integrity: an ASOCT study

Khokhar¹,

Sharma²,

Patil³

et al. 2014

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To compare intraocular lens implantation using a motorized injector vs standard manual injector through a 2.2-mm clear corneal incision. Methods Patients underwent standard phacoemulsification using a 2.2-mm clear corneal incision. Hydrophobic acrylic aspheric intraocular lens (Acrysof SN60WF intraocular lens (IOL)) was inserted using D cartridge with manual monarch injector or autosert motorized injector. IOL safety, final incision size and wound integrity in terms of anterior and posterior wound gape, and descemet's membrane detachment were compared between the two groups at post-operative day 1 and at 1 month using Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography. Results The study recruited 32 patients in the group I (manual injector) and 30 patients in group II (motorized injector). In group I, the final incision after IOL insertion increased by 0.12 mm (95% CI: 0.134-0.106) (Po0.0001), which was seen in 100% of the patients. In group II, the incision enlarged by 0.01 (95% CI: 0.021-0.0.001) (P ¼ 0.07) and was seen in only 6.67% of the cases. IOL nicks were seen in 9.37% of the cases in group I only. Although the incidence of descemet's membrane detachment and anterior wound gape was similar for both groups, posterior wound gape was seen more often with the manual injector in the immediate postoperative period. (P ¼ 0.018) Conclusion The motorized insertion system was gentle and safe for the IOLs with lesser incidence of IOL nicks. Regarding wound safety, it caused significantly less incision enlargement and better posterior wound integrity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of new motorized injector vs manual injector for implantation of foldable intraocular lenses on wound integrity: an ASOCT study

Khokhar¹,

Sharma²,

Patil³

et al. 2014

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first three steps (corneal incision, capsulorhexis, and fragmentation) have been partially or fully automated by OCT‐based femtosecond laser systems . Automation of the final step (implant insertion) has also been investigated to improve precision over that of a human surgeon . However, the cataract‐extraction procedure remains a manually performed operation, despite being the main source of the aforementioned surgical complications.…”

Section: Background and Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[11][12][13][14][15] Automation of the final step (implant insertion) has also been investigated to improve precision over that of a human surgeon. 16 However, the cataract-extraction procedure remains a manually performed operation, despite being the main source of the aforementioned surgical complications.…”

Section: Background and Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intraocular robotic interventional surgical system (IRISS): Semi‐automated OCT‐guided cataract removal

Chen

Lee

Gerber

et al. 2018

Int J Med Robotics Comput Assist Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background With the development of laser‐assisted platforms, the outcomes of cataract surgery have been improved by automating several procedures. The cataract‐extraction step continues to be manually performed, but due to deficiencies in sensing capabilities, surgical complications such as posterior capsule rupture and incomplete cataract removal remain. Methods An optical coherence tomography (OCT) system is integrated into our intraocular robotic interventional surgical system (IRISS) robot. The OCT images are used for preoperative planning and intraoperative intervention in a series of automated procedures. Real‐time intervention allows surgeons to evaluate the progress and override the operation. Results The developed system was validated by performing lens extraction on 30 postmortem pig eyes. Complete lens extraction was achieved on 25 eyes, and “almost complete” extraction was achieved on the remainder due to an inability to image small lens particles behind the iris. No capsule rupture was found. Conclusion The IRISS successfully demonstrated semiautomated OCT‐guided lens removal with real‐time supervision and intervention.

show abstract

Corneal incision architecture after IOL implantation with three different injectors: an environmental scanning electron microscopy study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Final incision size after implantation of a hydrophobic acrylic aspheric intraocular lens: New motorized injector versus standard manual injector

Abstract: The motorized injector was easy to use, and its use with an injection speed of 4.4 mm/sec caused significantly less incision enlargement than the manual injector during IOL implantation.

Cited by 27 publications

References 23 publications

Comparison of new motorized injector vs manual injector for implantation of foldable intraocular lenses on wound integrity: an ASOCT study

Comparison of new motorized injector vs manual injector for implantation of foldable intraocular lenses on wound integrity: an ASOCT study

Intraocular robotic interventional surgical system (IRISS): Semi‐automated OCT‐guided cataract removal

Corneal incision architecture after IOL implantation with three different injectors: an environmental scanning electron microscopy study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About