J Korean Ophthalmol Soc > Volume 56(1); 2015 > Article
Journal of the Korean Ophthalmological Society 2015;56(1):19-24.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2015.56.1.19    Published online January 15, 2015.
Comparison of Clinical Results between 2.2 mm and 2.8 mm Incision Cataract Surgery Using Ellips Ultrasound.
Woon Hyung Ghim, Yong Kyun Shin, Kyong Jin Cho
Department of Ophthalmology, Dankook University Medical College, Cheonan, Korea. perfectcure@hanmail.net
엘립스 방식의 초음파유화기를 이용한 2.2 mm와 2.8 mm 절개 백내장 수술의 결과 비교
김운형⋅신용균⋅조경진
Department of Ophthalmology, Dankook University Medical College, Cheonan, Korea
Abstract
PURPOSE
Introduction of phacoemulsification and development of foldable artificial lens has facilitated smaller incisions, even micro-coaxial incisions. However, there have been several studies showing that micro-coaxial incision has no benefit compared with the conventional small incision method. Cases where Ellips ultrasound was used have not yet been reported. Therefore, we compared the postoperative results between 2.2-mm and 2.8-mm incision groups using Ellips ultrasound. METHODS: Among 49 eyes receiving cataract surgery from March, 2012 to August, 2012, 27 eyes in the 2.2-mm group and 22 eyes in the 2.8-mm group were examined to obtain cumulated dissipated energy (CDE), use of balanced salt solution (BSS), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), corneal endothelial cell count (ECC), corneal thickness at center and incision site, and keratometric astigmatism before and after surgery. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the 2.2-mm and 2.8-mm groups in CDE (2.5 +/- 2.0 vs. 2.5 +/- 2.3) and use of BSS (188 +/- 127 vs. 138 +/- 43 mL) during the surgery, BCVA (-0.45 +/- 0.62 vs. -0.55 +/- 0.79 log MAR), ECC (-178 +/- 210 vs. -99 +/- 114 cells/mm2), corneal thickness at center (23 +/- 23 vs. 27 +/- 23 microm) and incision site (24 +/- 19 vs. 27 +/- 19 microm) and keratometric astigmatism before and after the surgery. CONCLUSIONS: A 2.2-mm micro-coaxial incision using Ellips ultrasound showed no statistically significant differences in BCVA, ECC, corneal thickness at center and incision site, and keratometric astigmatism compared with 2.8-mm small incision.
Key Words: Cataract surgery;Ellips;Micro-coaxial incision;Small incision


ABOUT
BROWSE ARTICLES
EDITORIAL POLICY
FOR CONTRIBUTORS
Editorial Office
SKY 1004 Building #701
50-1 Jungnim-ro, Jung-gu, Seoul 04508, Korea
Tel: +82-2-583-6520    Fax: +82-2-583-6521    E-mail: kos08@ophthalmology.org                

Copyright © 2021 by Korean Ophthalmological Society.

Developed in M2PI

Close layer
prev next