Comparison of cumulative dissipated energy delivered by active-fluidic pressure control phacoemulsification system versus gravity-fluidics
To compare the cumulative dissipated energy (CDE), aspiration time and estimated aspiration fluid utilized during phacoemulsification cataract surgery using two phacoemulsification systems .
A total of 164 consecutive eyes of 164 patients undergoing cataract surgery, 82 in the active-fluidics group and 82 in the gravity-fluidics group were enrolled in this study. Cataracts graded NII to NIII using LOCS II were included. Each subject was randomly assigned to one of the two platforms with a specific configuration: the active-fluidics Centurion ® phacoemulsification system or the gravity-fluidics Infiniti ® Vision System. CDE, aspiration time (AT) and the mean estimated aspiration fluid (EAF) were registered and compared.
A mean age of 68.3 ± 9.8 years was found (range 57–92 years), and no significant difference was evident between both groups. A positive correlation between the CDE values obtained by both platforms was verified (r = 0.271, R 2 = 0.073, P = 0.013). Similarly, a significant correlation was evidenced for the EAF (r = 0.334, R 2 = 0.112, P = 0.046) and AT values (r = 0.156, R 2 = 0.024, P = 0.161). A statistically significantly lower CDE count, aspiration time and estimated fluid were obtained using the active-fluidics configuration when compared to the gravity-fluidics configuration by 19.29, 12.10 and 9.29%, respectively (P = 0.001, P < 0.0001 and P = 0.001).
The active-fluidics Centurion ® phacoemulsification system achieved higher surgical efficiency than the gravity-fluidics Infiniti ® IP system for NII and NIII cataracts.
KeywordsCataract surgery Phacoemulsification Cumulative dissipated energy Active-fluidics Gravity-fluidics
We would like to thank all patients that contributed their time and thus allowed us to obtain the data for this publication. Also, our deepest appreciation to the Luis Sánchez Bulnes Hospital at the Asociación para Evitar la Ceguera en México I.A.P. No grant or funding was received for the realization of this work.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 3.Lündstrom M, Barry P, Henry Y, Rosen P, Stenevi U (2012) Evidence-based guidelines for cataract surgery: guidelines based on data in the European Registry of Quality Outcomes for Cataract and Refractive Surgery database. J Cataract Refract Surg 38:1086–1093. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2012.03.006 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar