Venkatesh Rengaraj, Chang David F, Muralikrishnan Radhakrishnan, Hemal Kenia, Gogate Pariskshit, Sengupta Sabyasachi
From the *Aravind Eye Hospital, Pondicherry, India; †The University of California, San Francisco, CA; ‡Cambridge Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom; §Dr. Gogate's Eye Clinic, Pune; and ¶Vision Research Foundation, Sankara Nethralaya, Chennai, India.
Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila). 2012 Mar-Apr;1(2):113-9. doi: 10.1097/APO.0b013e318249f7b9.
We aim at reviewing published peer-reviewed studies that evaluate the safety and efficacy of manual small incision cataract surgery (MSICS). Literature searches of the PubMed and the Cochrane Library databases were conducted with no date restrictions; the searches were limited to articles published in English only. All publications with at least level II and III evidence were studied and surgical techniques were analyzed. MSICS was also compared with phacoemulsification and large incision extracapsular cataract surgery (ECCE) with respect to visual outcome, surgery time, cost, intra and postoperative complications and suitability for high volume surgical practices in the developing world.The overall safety profile of MSICS was found to be excellent with intra and postoperative complication rates comparable to phacoemulsification and ECCE. Multiple studies reported the safety and efficacy of MSICS for complicated cases, such as brunescent and white cataract and cataracts associated with phacolytic and phacomorphic glaucoma. Compared to phacoemulsification MSICS was associated with lower and shorter operative times. Visual outcomes were excellent and comparable to phacoemulsification with up to 6 months follow up.The literature provides outcome analysis of a variety of different MSICS techniques. As a whole, MSICS provides excellent outcomes with a low rate of surgical and postoperative complications. Particularly in the developing world, MSICS appears to provide outcomes that are of comparable quality to phacoemulsification at a much lower cost.
我们旨在回顾已发表的经同行评审的研究,这些研究评估了手法小切口白内障手术(MSICS)的安全性和有效性。我们在PubMed和Cochrane图书馆数据库中进行了无日期限制的文献检索;检索仅限于仅以英文发表的文章。对所有至少具有II级和III级证据的出版物进行了研究,并分析了手术技术。还就视觉效果、手术时间、成本、术中及术后并发症以及在发展中国家进行高容量手术实践的适用性等方面,将MSICS与超声乳化白内障吸除术和大切口囊外白内障摘除术(ECCE)进行了比较。结果发现,MSICS的总体安全性良好,术中及术后并发症发生率与超声乳化白内障吸除术和ECCE相当。多项研究报告了MSICS在复杂病例中的安全性和有效性,如棕色白内障和白色白内障以及与晶状体溶解性青光眼和晶状体形态性青光眼相关的白内障。与超声乳化白内障吸除术相比,MSICS的手术时间更短。在长达6个月的随访中,视觉效果良好,与超声乳化白内障吸除术相当。文献提供了对多种不同MSICS技术的结果分析。总体而言,MSICS的手术和术后并发症发生率低,效果良好。特别是在发展中国家,MSICS似乎能以低得多的成本提供与超声乳化白内障吸除术质量相当的结果。