Scheimpflug photography study of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices during simulated cataract surgery

Holmén, J.örgen B; Lundgren, Björn

doi:10.1016/s0886-3350(02)01619-x

Cited by 9 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Healon5 acts as a very viscous, cohesive agent at low flow rates and as a pseudodispersive agent at higher flow rates. The capacity of Healon5 to maintain the anterior chamber depth during simulated cataract surgery in porcine cadaver eyes was significantly higher than that of the other OVDs (Holmén & Lundgren 2002). However, at flow rates of approximately 25 cm 3 /min or over, this agent would tend to flow out of the eye.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Soft‐shell technique using Viscoat^® and Healon^®5: a prospective, randomized comparison between a dispersive‐viscoadaptive and a dispersive‐cohesive soft‐shell technique

Sato

Sakata

Yabe

et al. 2008

Acta Ophthalmologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. Purpose: To compare the efficacy of the dispersive‐viscoadaptive soft‐shell technique using Viscoat® and Healon®5 to the dispersive‐cohesive soft‐shell technique in reducing corneal endothelial cell damage during cataract surgery. Methods: In this prospective randomized study, 207 eyes of 171 cataract patients underwent phacoemulsification using the dispersive‐viscoadaptive soft‐shell technique (V‐group, 102 eyes) with Viscoat and Healon5 or the dispersive‐cohesive soft‐shell technique (C‐group, 105 eyes) with Viscoat and a cohesive agent (Opegan‐Hi®). Each group was divided into two subgroups depending on the amount of ultrasound (%Min) used during phacoemulsification. Corneal endothelial cell density was examined preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. The endothelial cell loss was compared between the two groups, and also between the subgroups. Results: The mean endothelial cell loss 3 months after surgery was 8.4 ± 5.6% standard deviation (SD) in the V‐group and 8.2 ± 6.2% in the C‐group (P = 0.787). In the subgroups with ultrasound of 10 %Min or less, the mean endothelial cell loss 3 months after surgery was 6.6 ± 4.6% in the V‐group and 5.5 ± 5.0% in the C‐group (P = 0.104). In the subgroups with ultrasound of over 10 %Min, this value was 10.6 ± 6.3% in the V‐group and 11.9 ± 5.7% in the C‐group (P = 0.413). The correlation coefficient of the endothelial cell loss rate and %Min was 0.245 (P = 0.0129) in the V‐group and 0.501 (P < 0.0001) in the C‐group. Conclusion: The dispersive‐viscoadaptive soft‐shell technique is as effective as the dispersive‐cohesive soft‐shell technique in protecting corneal endothelial cells during phacoemulsification regardless of the amount of ultrasound energy used.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Soft‐shell technique using Viscoat^® and Healon^®5: a prospective, randomized comparison between a dispersive‐viscoadaptive and a dispersive‐cohesive soft‐shell technique

Sato

Sakata

Yabe

et al. 2008

Acta Ophthalmologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While this method is very useful, it is difficult to observe the cross section between the corneal endothelium and the phaco tip in detail. Holmén and Lundgren have reported that the use of a surgical microscope for the anterior segment analysis system (EAS-1000, Nidek Co., Ltd.) enabled comparison of the anterior chamber depth maintenance and retention capacities of the commercially available OVDs, within a porcine cadaver eye model during simulated phacoemulsification [ 15 ]. Although results obtained by this method allow better understanding of the retention of OVDs in the anterior chamber with partial observation, it remains impossible to analyze fluid dynamics and retention of OVDs in the anterior chamber during cataract surgery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Novel “Slit Side View” Method to Evaluate Fluid Dynamics during Phacoemulsification

Suzuki

Igarashi

Shiwa

et al. 2018

Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to recent technical advances in cataract surgeries, there has been a significant improvement in the safety and surgical outcomes of phacoemulsification. However, the corneal endothelium can be damaged during phacoemulsification by multiple factors. Therefore, we used a slit lamp to analyze the fluid dynamics of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs) in the anterior chamber during phacoemulsification. In this experimental study, extracted porcine eyes were injected with OVDs stained with fluorescein through a side port of the eye and then fixed on a slit lamp microscope. After inserting a phaco tip, phacoemulsification simulation was then performed on the iris plane. Subsequent movements of OVDs in the anterior chamber were observed during the procedure by using a slit lamp microscope. Aspiration and removal of cohesive OVDs from the inside of the anterior chamber occurred within a few seconds after the ultrasonic vibration. Aspiration of dispersive OVDs occurred gradually, with some of the OVDs remaining on the side of the anterior chamber side in an irregular shape. This shape enabled the OVD to trap the air, thereby preventing the air from directly touching the corneal endothelium. Viscoadaptive OVDs remained inside the anterior chamber as a lump, with the infusion solution flowing between the corneal endothelium and the OVD, thus leading to the eventual aspiration of the OVD. Viscous dispersive OVDs remained as a lump between the corneal endothelium and the phaco tip. However, once the infusion solution flowed between the cornea and the OVD, the OVD detached from the corneal endothelium, indicating that this type would likely be aspirated and removed. This method, termed the “slit side view,” enables viewing of the movement of OVDs during surgery, as well as observation of the fluid dynamics in the anterior chamber.

show abstract

Corneal edema and intraocular pressure after cataract surgery

Moser

Martı́n-Baranera²,

Garat

et al. 2004

Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Scheimpflug photography study of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices during simulated cataract surgery

Abstract: The capacity of Healon5 to maintain the ACD during cataract surgery, ie, neutralizing the vitreous pressure and stabilizing the anterior segment of the eye, was significantly higher than that of the other OVDs.

Cited by 9 publications

References 15 publications

Soft‐shell technique using Viscoat^® and Healon^®5: a prospective, randomized comparison between a dispersive‐viscoadaptive and a dispersive‐cohesive soft‐shell technique

Soft‐shell technique using Viscoat^® and Healon^®5: a prospective, randomized comparison between a dispersive‐viscoadaptive and a dispersive‐cohesive soft‐shell technique

A Novel “Slit Side View” Method to Evaluate Fluid Dynamics during Phacoemulsification

Corneal edema and intraocular pressure after cataract surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Scheimpflug photography study of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices during simulated cataract surgery

Abstract: The capacity of Healon5 to maintain the ACD during cataract surgery, ie, neutralizing the vitreous pressure and stabilizing the anterior segment of the eye, was significantly higher than that of the other OVDs.

Cited by 9 publications

References 15 publications

Soft‐shell technique using Viscoat® and Healon®5: a prospective, randomized comparison between a dispersive‐viscoadaptive and a dispersive‐cohesive soft‐shell technique

Soft‐shell technique using Viscoat® and Healon®5: a prospective, randomized comparison between a dispersive‐viscoadaptive and a dispersive‐cohesive soft‐shell technique

A Novel “Slit Side View” Method to Evaluate Fluid Dynamics during Phacoemulsification

Corneal edema and intraocular pressure after cataract surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Soft‐shell technique using Viscoat^® and Healon^®5: a prospective, randomized comparison between a dispersive‐viscoadaptive and a dispersive‐cohesive soft‐shell technique

Soft‐shell technique using Viscoat^® and Healon^®5: a prospective, randomized comparison between a dispersive‐viscoadaptive and a dispersive‐cohesive soft‐shell technique