Posters

Phacoemulsification parameters: femtosecond-assisted cataract surgery versus phacoemulsification

Poster Details

First Author: L.Bascaran SPAIN

Co Author(s):    N. Goñi   M. Aldazabal   M. de Frutos-Lezaun   T. Alberdi   J. Mendicute  

Abstract Details

Purpose:

Describe and compare phacoemulsification parameters and fluidics during femtosecond laser assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) and conventional phacoemulsification.

Setting:

Hospital Universitario Donostia (Spain)

Methods:

Timing (minutes:seconds.milliseconds), phacoemulsification parameters and fluidics of 180 cataract surgeries (54 femtosecond assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) and 54 conventional phacoemulsification) are analysed. Total operation room occupation time, total intraocular surgery time, total ultrasound (US) time, total phacoemulsification time, total torsional energy time and total aspiration time are compared. Ultrasound energy (US energy), cumulative dissipated energy (CDE), mean phacoemulsification power, mean torsional amplitude and the fluid used for surgery are analysed.

Results:

Mean total operation room occupation time (±SD), mean total intraocular surgery time (±SD), mean total ultrasound time (±SD), mean total phacoemulsification time (±SD), mean total torsional energy time (±SD) and mean total aspiration time (±SD) were 22:45.57±03:28.05, 08:18.88±02:22.16, 00:48.76±00:20.74, 00:00.59±00:00.44, 00:49.17±00:19.75 and 03:02.5 ± 00:53.78 for FLACS and 17:38.83±02:34.99, 08:34.71±01:48.78, 00:59.15±00:24.24, 00:00.59±00:00.45, 00:58.54±00:24.08 and 03:24.38±01:25.25 for conventional phacoemulsification. Statistically significant differences between groups were found in total operation room occupation time, total ultrasound time and total torsional time (p<0.05). For FLACS, mean ultrasound energy (US energy), mean cumulative dissipated energy (CDE), mean phacoemulsification power, mean torsional amplitude and the fluid used were 0.19±0.02, 8.52±5.11, 0.43±0.06, 0.48±0.06 and 54.35 ± 14.08 respectively. For conventional phacoemulsification, these variables were 0.19±0.28, 9.57±6.19, 0.38±0.09, 0.48±0.07 and 64.35±13.39 respectively. Statistically significant differences between groups were found for mean phacoemulsification power and fluid (p<0.05)

Conclusions:

Significant phacoemulsification parameters and fluidic differences exist between FLACS and conventional phacoemulsification. Their importance and significance to clinical outcomes are to be studied. FINANCIAL INTEREST: One of more of the authors... travel has been funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented