1. Hayashi K, Hayashi H, Nakao F, Hayashi F. Risk factors for cor-neal endothelial injury during phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1996; 22:1079–84.
Article
2. Cameron MD, Poyer JF, Aust SD. Identification of free radicals produced during phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001; 27:463–70.
Article
3. Miyoshi T, Yoshida H. Emulsification action of longitudinal and torsional ultrasound tips and the effect on treatment of the nucleus during phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010; 36:1201–6.
Article
4. Zacharias J, Ohl CD. Fluid dynamics, cavitation, and tip-to-tissue interaction of longitudinal and torsional ultrasound modes during phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2013; 39:611–6.
Article
5. Zeng M, Liu X, Liu Y. . Torsional ultrasound modality for hard nucleus phacoemulsification cataract extraction. Br J Ophthalmol. 2008; 92:1092–6.
Article
6. Liu Y, Zeng M, Liu X. . Torsional mode versus conventional ultrasound mode phacoemulsification: randomized comparative clinical study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007; 33:287–92.
7. Reuschel A, Bogatsch H, Barth T, Wiedemann R. Comparison of endothelial changes and power settings between torsional and lon-gitudinal phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010; 36:1855–61.
Article
8. Packer M, Fine IH, Hoffman RS. MICS with different platforms: stellaris vision enhancement system. Alió JL, Fine IH, editors. Minimizing Incisions and Maximizing Outcomes in Cataract Surgery. 1st. Heidelberg: Springer;2010. p. 89–94.
Article
9. Holladay JT, Cravy TV, Koch DD. Calculating the surgically in-duced refractive change following ocular surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1992; 18:429–43.
Article
10. Aust SD, Hebdon T, Humbert J, Dimalanta R. Hydroxyl free radi-cal production during torsional phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010; 36:2146–9.
Article
11. Tognetto D, Cecchini P, Leon P. . Stroke dynamics and fre-quency of 3 phacoemulsification machines. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012; 38:333–42.
Article
12. Christakis PG, Braga-Mele RM. Intraoperative performance and postoperative outcome comparison of longitudinal, torsional, and transversal phacoemulsification machines. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012; 38:234–41.
Article
13. Ryoo NK, Kwon JW, Wee WR. . Thermal imaging comparison of Signature, Infiniti, and Stellaris phacoemulsification systems. BMC Ophthalmol. 2013; 13:53–7.
Article
14. Rekas M, Montés-Micó R, Krix-Jachym K. . Comparison of torsional and longitudinal modes using phacoemulsification parameters. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009; 35:1719–24.
15. Gonen T, Sever O, Horozoglu F. . Endothelial cell loss: biaxial small-incision torsional phacoemulsification versus biaxial small- incision longitudinal phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012; 38:1918–24.
16. Kim DH, Wee WR, Lee JH, Kim MK. The comparison between torsional and conventional mode phacoemulsification in moderate and hard cataracts. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2010; 24:336–40.
Article
17. Bozkurt E, Bayraktar S, Yazgan S. . Comparison of conven-tional and torsional mode (OZil) phacoemulsification: randomized prospective clinical study. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2009; 19:984–9.
Article
18. Ratnarajan G, Packard R, Ward M. Combined occlusion-triggered longitudinal and torsional phacoemulsification during coaxial mi-croincision cataract surgery: effect on 30-degree mini-flared tip behavior. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011; 37:825–9.
Article
19. Vasavada AR, Praveen MR, Vasavada VA. . Impact of high and low aspiration parameters on postoperative outcomes of phacoe-mulsification: randomized clinical trial. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010; 36:588–93.
Article
20. Wong T, Hingorani M, Lee V. Phacoemulsification time and power requirements in phaco chop and divide and conquer nucleofractis techniques. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000; 26:1374–8.
Article
21. Baradaran-Rafii A, Rahmati-Kamel M, Eslani M. . Effect of hydrodynamic parameters on corneal endothelial cell loss after phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009; 35:732–7.
Article