Impact of different manufacturers and gauge sizes on the performance of backflush needle

Abstract

The present study aimed to identify the factors regulating aspiration rate (AR) of backflush needles and to compare those factors across various backflush needles from different manufacturers. The 27-gauge (27G), 25-gauge, and 23-gauge backflush needles from four different manufacturers, Alcon, MedOne, VitreQ, and DORC, were used for this experiment. AR was measured at four different aspiration vacuum levels: 100, 200, 400, and 650 mmHg. AR was significantly increased as the aspiration vacuum level increased when both aspirating balanced salt solution (BSS) and ethylene glycol; however, 27G products from VitreQ and MedOne were unable to aspirate ethylene glycol at the low aspiration vacuum level of 100 mmHg. When aspirating BSS at the high aspiration vacuum level of 650 mmHg, a smaller gauge number generally resulted in a significantly higher AR. AR, inner diameter, and cross-sectional area in Alcon products were significantly larger in any gauge, and the shaft length of Alcon products was significantly shorter than those of other manufacturers’ products in any gauge. Cross-sectional area negatively correlated with the degree of shaft deflection (r2 = 0.21, p = 0.042). These results imply that AR differs significantly among backflush needles and among companies depending on the shaft cross-sectional area.

Hybrid 23/25-Gauge Direct Perfluorocarbon Liquid—Silicone Oil Exchange

“…Poiseuille's law states that the fluid flow rate (Q) is directly proportional to the fourth power of the radius of the transmitting tube (r 4 ), viscosity of the fluid (ԉ), and pressure gradient between the two ends of the transmitting tube. 6,7 Given that the internal diameters of 25, 23, and 20-g are 0.26 mm to 0.29 mm, 0.36 mm to 0.39 mm and 0.52 mm, respectively, 8 we therefore expect the increase of PFCL outflow to be approximately 21.5-fold when changing one port from 25-to 23-gauge, 1.5-fold for a 23/20-gauge change and 2-fold for 25/20-gauge.…”

Nonperforating Intrascleral Stabbing for Sutureless 23g Sclerotomy Closure

“…However, the stiffness and efficiency of the instruments, which are lost as 23G is avoided, remains another issue worth discussing. 14,15…”

“…However, the stiffness and efficiency of the instruments, which are lost as 23G is avoided, remains another issue worth discussing. 14,15 To date, various efforts to optimize sutureless sclerotomy closure, including scleral wound hydration, application of bioadhesives and polyethylene glycolbased hydrogel bandage, cauterization of sclerotomy sites, wedge-shaped sclerotomies, transconjunctival plain gut tape procedure, scleral needling, refashioning of 23G sclerotomies, and hermetic closure, have been reported. 12,13,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29] Although these techniques offer bright perspectives for achieving closure of the sclerotomy, there may be potential limitations for cost and patient discomfort.…”