Evidence Hub

Differences in energy and corneal endothelium between femtosecond laser-assisted and conventional cataract surgeries: prospective, intraindividual, randomized controlled trial

L. Bascarán, Txomin Alberdi, I. Martínez-Soroa, C. Sarasqueta, J. Mendicute

International Journal of Ophthalmology, 2018

92 participants · 34 citations

Abstract

AIM

To compare intraoperative phacoemulsification parameters and its effect on the corneal endothelium of eyes undergoing femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) versus conventional phacoemulsification (CP) cataract surgery.

METHODS

Two hundred eyes from one hundred patients were included in a prospective, non-blinded, randomized, controlled, intraindividual clinical study. One hundred eyes underwent FLACS while their one hundred fellow eyes underwent CP. All surgeries were performed using the Victus® femtosecond laser platform and Infinity® Vision System phacoemulsification machine. Primary outcome measure was endothelial cell density 6mo after surgery. Secondary outcome measures included central corneal thickness (CCT), average cell area, standard deviation, coefficient of variation and hexagonality before surgery and 6mo after surgery and endothelial cell density loss during this period were also evaluated. Intraoperative efficiency parameters [cumulative dissipated energy (CDE), total intraocular surgery time, total ultrasound time, total phacoemulsification time, total torsional energy time, total aspiration time, ultrasound energy, torsional amplitude and fluid required during surgery] were also collated.

RESULTS

Data from these patients was not considered for analysis. Data from 92 patients were analysed. Postoperative endothelial cell density (cells/mm2) between groups (2211.88±392.49 CP; 2246.31±403.48 FLACS) was not statistically significant (P=0.869).…

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: 92 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