J Korean Ophthalmol Soc.  2009 Apr;50(4):537-541. 10.3341/jkos.2009.50.4.537.

Comparison Between Bimanual Microincisional Cataract Surgery and Conventional Coaxial Phacoemulsification

• Kim HK
• Lee HS
• Park SH
• Joo CK

• KMID: 2212254
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2009.50.4.537

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate corneal endothelial cell changes after conventional coaxial phacoemulsification and bimanual microincision cataract surgery (MICS).
METHODS
Forty patients were divided into 2 groups, coaxial phacoemulsification (Group 1, n=20), and MICS (Group 2, n=20). To evaluate corneal endothelial cell changes after coaxial phacoemulsification and bimanual MICS, intraoperative phacoemulsification power and volume of intraoperative irrigation solution (balanced salt solution, BSS(R), Alcon, U.S.A) were measured. Central corneal thickness and endothelial cell count were also evaluated, preoperatively and at 1 week, and 2 months postoperatively.
RESULTS
Between the 2 groups, there was no statistically significant difference in intraoperative phacoemulsification power and volume of intraoperative irrigation solution (balanced salt solution, BSS(R), Alcon, U.S.A.) (p>0.05). In addition, there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in endothelial cell count and central corneal thickness (p>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
When comparing bimanual MICS and conventional coaxial phacoemulsification, bimanual MICS appears to have similar endothelial cell changes. In conclusion, MICS has the same safety as compared to coaxial phacoemulsification.

Keyword

Bimual microincisional cataract surgery (Bimanual MICS); Coaxial phacoemulsification; Endothelial cell count; Irrigation solution volume; Phacopower

MeSH Terms

Cataract
Endothelial Cells
Humans
Phacoemulsification

Reference

References

1. Alio J, Rodriguez-Prats JL, Galal A, Ramzy M. Outcomes of Microincision Cataract versus Coaxial Phacoemulsification. Ophthalmology. 2005; 112:1997–2003.

2. Osher RH. Osher. Microcoaxial phacoemulsification Part 2: Clinical study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007; 33:408–12.

3. Kelman CD. Phacoemulsification and aspiration. A new technique of cataract removal. A preliminary report. Am J Ophthalmol. 1967; 64:23–35.

4. Jared Emery, Roger F. Steinert. Extracapsular Cataract Surgery: Indications and Techniques. Roger F. Steinert, editor. Cataract surgery. 2nd ed.Philadelphia: Saunders;2004. v. l. chap. 10.

5. Wiliam J. Fishkind, Thomas F. Neuhann, Roger F. Steinert. The Phaco Machine: The Physical Principles Guiding Its Operation. Roger F. Steinert, editor. Cataract surgery. 2nd ed.Philadelphia: Saunders;2004. v. l. chap. 7.

6. Donnenfeld ED, Olson RJ, Solomon R, et al. Efficacy and wound-temperature gradient of Whitestar phacoemulsification through 1.2 mm incision. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003; 29:1097–100.

7. Shepherd JR. Induced astigmatism in small incision cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1989; 15:85–8.

8. Steinert RF, Brint SF, White SM, Find IH. Astigmatism after small incision cataract surgery. A prospective, randomized, multicenter comparison of 4 and 6.5 mm incision. Ophthalmology. 1997; 98:417–23.

9. Lee DH, Kim JH, Kim HJ. Endothelial Cell Damage in Microincision Cataract Surgery and Coaxial Phacoemulsification. J Korean Ophahtlmol Soc. 2007; 48:19–26.

10. Mencucci R, Ponchietti C, Virgili G, et al. Corneal endothelial damage after cataract surgery: Microincision versus standard technique. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006; 32:1351–4.

11. Milia E, Verges C, Cipres M. Corneal endothelium evaluation after phacoemulsification with continuous anterior chamber infusion. Cornea. 2005; 24:278–82.