Posters

Reducing the size of incision in phacoemulsification – Boon or a bane?

Poster Details

First Author: A.Gandhi INDIA

Co Author(s):    S. Kumar                    

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To compare the intraoperative efficiency and postoperative visual outcome of coaxial phacoemulsification using 2.2 mm clear corneal incision and 2.8 mm clear corneal incision coaxial phacoemulsification.

Setting:

VENUE: Department of Ophthalmology in ESIC hospital, New Delhi, India. DURATION: The study was conducted over period of 2 years STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, comparative interventional study conducted at a single center on patients undergoing cataract surgery.

Methods:

SAMPLE SIZE: 500 eyes were enrolled and randomly divided in two groups of 250 each using table of random numbers. Pre-op assessment included corneal topography ,central corneal thickness and corneal endothelial cell count. All surgeries were performed by the same surgeon under peribulbar anesthesia. The incision was given on the steeper corneal meridian, using a 2.8 mm metal tip knife in the coaxial phacoemulsification GROUP I and a 2.2 mm metal tip knife in GROUP II. An Infiniti® Vision System Ozil® phacoemulsification platform was used in both groups. Evaluation was done using predefined intraoperaitve and postoperative parameters.

Results:

Our study suggests while the change in astigmatism as measured by the corneal topographer 2 months postoperatively in the 2.8mm (0.55 D±0.4) group was more than in 2.2mm (0.50D±0.4) group, the results were not found to be statistically significant (p=0.5). Also, mean endothelial cell loss 2 months following coaxial phacoemulsification through 2.2mm incision was 220±41.5 and 230±41.23 in the 2.8mm incision group which again wasnot statistically significant. Time taken by the surgeon to perform phacoemulsification was also comparable in the two groups. There was no difference in the incidence of the intraoperative and postoperative complications between the two groups.

Conclusions:

Although, it has been widely known that reduction in incision size leads to a better refractive outcome, reduction of incision size to 2.2mm showed minimal advantage in astigmatic and other parameters when compared to 2.8mm insicion. It however has better wound stability, and infection prevention, as evidenced by our study.

Financial Disclosure:

None