
doi: 10.7869/djo.68
Purpose: To compare corneal endothelial cell loss between Torsional phacoemulsification and Linear phacoemulsification systems for cataract surgery. Materials and Methods: A prospective randomized study of 100 eyes of 100 patients, who underwent cataract surgery between September 2011 and September 2013, was done. They were divided into two groups, 50 patients underwent torsional phacoemulsification (phaco) and 50 patients underwent linear phacoemulsification. All patients were operated on same phaco machine by the same surgeon. Corneal endothelial cell loss comparison between the two groups was done using specular microscopy. Patients more than 40 years of age of either sex with senile cataract of nuclear sclerosis (NS) grade 2 -3 (according to LOCSII) were included in the study. Age <40, >70 years, corneal pathologies, poorly dilating pupil or posterior synechiae, pseudoexfoliation, subluxated lens, retinal pathology, glaucoma, diabetes mellitus, collagen vascular diseases, post refractive surgeries were excluded. Results: The mean percentage change of corneal endothelial cell density (ECD) from baseline was 3.5% in torsional group and 5.1% in linear group on postoperative day1 (p value= 0.026) 6.3% in torsional group and 9.8% in linear group on postoperative day 7 (p < 0.001) and 8.1% in torsional group and 10.78% in linear group on postoperative day 30 (p =0.001). Conclusions: There was statistically significant difference in corneal endothelial cell loss between torsional phacoemulsification and linear phacoemulsification systems for cataract surgery. The mean loss of corneal endothelial cells was statistically significantly less in torsional phacoemulsification than linear Phacoemulsification.
corneal endothelial cell loss, specular microscopy, torsional phacoemulsification, R, Medicine, linear phacoemulsification
corneal endothelial cell loss, specular microscopy, torsional phacoemulsification, R, Medicine, linear phacoemulsification
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
