A comparable study of clinical and optical outcomes after 1.8, 2.0 mm microcoaxial and 3.0 mm coaxial cataract surgery
Author:
Corresponding Author:

Affiliation:

Clc Number:

Fund Project:

Supported by the Key Program of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81130018); National Twelfth Five-Year Plan Foundation of China (No. 2012BAI08B01); Zhejiang Key Innovation Team Project of China (No. 2009R50039); Zhejiang Key Laboratory Fund of China (No. 2011E10006).

  • Article
  • |
  • Figures
  • |
  • Metrics
  • |
  • Reference
  • |
  • Related
  • |
  • Cited by
  • |
  • Materials
  • |
  • Comments
    Abstract:

    AIM: To evaluate the clinical and optical outcomes after clear corneal incision cataract surgery (CICS) with three different incision sizes (1.8, 2.0 and 3.0 mm). METHODS: Eyes of 150 patients with age-related cataract scheduled for coaxial cataract surgery were randomized to three groups: 1.8, 2.0, or 3.0 mm CICS. Intraoperative data and postoperative outcomes including surgically induced astigmatism (SIA), the corneal incision thickness, wavefront aberrations and modulation transfer function (MTF) of cornea were obtained. RESULTS: There were no significant differences among the three groups in demographic characteristics and intraoperative outcome. The 1.8 and 2.0 mm microincisions showed more satisfactory clinical outcomes than the 3.0 mm incision. The 1.8 mm incision showed significantly less SIA than the 2.0 mm incision until postoperative 1mo (P<0.05), but the difference was only 0.14-0.18 D. Combined with less increased incision thickness only at postoperative 1d (P=0.013), the 1.8 mm incision presented better uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCDVA) than the 2.0 mm incision only at 1d postoperatively (P=0.008). For higher-order aberrations and other Zernike coefficients, there were no significant differences between the 1.8 mm group and 2.0 mm group (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Converting from 3.0 mm CICS to 1.8 or 2.0 mm CICS result in better clinical and optical outcomes. However, when incision is 1.8 mm, the benefits from further reduction in size compared with 2.0 mm are limited. The necessity to reduce the incision size is to be deliberated.

    Reference
    Related
    Cited by
Get Citation

Yi-Bo Yu, Ya-Nan Zhu, Wei Wang, et al. A comparable study of clinical and optical outcomes after 1.8, 2.0 mm microcoaxial and 3.0 mm coaxial cataract surgery. Int J Ophthalmol, 2016,9(3):399-405

Copy
Share
Article Metrics
  • Abstract:
  • PDF:
  • HTML:
  • Cited by:
Publication History
  • Received:January 31,2015
  • Revised:July 06,2015
  • Adopted:
  • Online: March 11,2016
  • Published: