Evidence Hub

Comparison of Post-Operative Outcomes between IOP-20 and IOP-50 in Phacoemulsification with Active Fluidics System: Randomized Single Blinded Trial

Wavikar CM, Tanna MN, Wavikar GC, Kale CB, Setia MS

Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025

55 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the central corneal thickness, mitigation events, post-operative vision, and complications in patients who underwent cataract surgery using the CENTURION ® Vision System with the ACTIVE SENTRY ® (Alcon Industries, Inc.) system and were assigned to one of two groups: intraocular pressure (IOP) group 20 or 50.

Setting: Wavikar Eye Institute, Thane, India.

Design: A prospective comparative two arm, randomized, single blinded, interventional study.

Methods: A total of 107 eyes were randomized to either the IOP-20 (n=55) or IOP-50 (n=52) group. All patients underwent phacoemulsification with an active fluidics system performed by a single surgeon; intraocular pressure (IOP) was set at either 20 or 50 mmHg.

Results: The mean [SD] baseline CCT in the IOP-20 group was 511.9 [35.7] μm and it was 521.1 [34.8] μm in the IOP 50 group (p=0.18). It had changed to 530.6 [39.8] μm in the IOP-20 group and 539.5 [39.2] μm in the IOP 50 (p=0.24). The mean [SD] ECD at the end of day 90 was 2423.0 [204.6] cells/mm2 in the IOP-20 group and 2476.1 [236.0] cells/mm2 in the IOP-50 group (p=0.22). Approximately 22% of the eyes in the IOP-20 group and 77% of the eyes in the IOP-50 group required active surge mitigation; this difference was statistically significant (p<0.001).

Conclusion: We found that the phacoemulsification with an active fluidics system handpiece at 20 mmHg provided a safe and stable environment for cataract surgery.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 55 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free