Khokhar Sudarshan, Aron Neelima, Sen Sagnik, Pillay Ganesh, Agarwal Esha
From the Department of Ophthalmology, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
From the Department of Ophthalmology, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017 Jan;43(1):22-28. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.11.034.
To compare the outcomes of torsional phacoemulsification with a new balanced tip (Intrepid) and a conventional tip (Kelman) using a single active-fluidics torsional phacoemulsification machine (Centurion).
Dr. Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Prospective comparative case-control study.
Patients with senile cataract had torsional phacoemulsification with the Kelman conventional tip or the new Intrepid balanced tip using the active-fluidics torsional machine. Intraoperative parameters, such as cumulative dissipated energy (CDE), total ultrasound (US) time, torsion use time, torsion amplitude, aspiration time, and fluid use, were noted and compared. Endothelial cell loss and central corneal thickness (CCT) changes were evaluated at 1 month.
The new tip showed significantly less CDE, total US time, torsion amplitude, aspiration time, and fluid use (8.55 ± 6.9 [SD], 33.59 ± 28.12 seconds, 37.8 ± 13.42, 173.19 ± 47.26 seconds, and 66.59 ± 20.44 mL, respectively) than the conventional tip (13.47 ± 10.65, 42.8 ± 33.46 seconds, 42.58 ± 16.38, 202.25 ± 71.28 seconds, and 97.14 ± 36.86 mL, respectively) (P < .01), especially in higher grades of cataract. Anterior capsulorhexis margin tear occurred in 2 patients with the new tip. There were no corneal burns in either group. The mean endothelial cell loss and the percentage change in CCT were not significantly different at 1 month.
The new balanced tip performed phacoemulsification more efficiently, especially in hard cataracts requiring higher energy and prolonged phacoemulsification time.
使用单主动流体扭转超声乳化仪（Centurion），比较新型平衡型探头（Intrepid）与传统探头（Kelman）进行扭转超声乳化的效果。
印度新德里全印医学科学研究所拉金德拉·普拉萨德眼科科学中心。
前瞻性比较病例对照研究。
老年性白内障患者使用主动流体扭转超声乳化仪，分别采用Kelman传统探头或新型Intrepid平衡型探头进行扭转超声乳化。记录并比较术中参数，如累积消散能量（CDE）、总超声时间、扭转使用时间、扭转幅度、抽吸时间和液体用量。在术后1个月评估内皮细胞损失和中央角膜厚度（CCT）变化。
新型探头的CDE、总超声时间、扭转幅度、抽吸时间和液体用量（分别为8.55±6.9[标准差]、33.59±28.12秒、37.8±13.42、173.19±47.26秒和66.59±20.44毫升）均显著低于传统探头（分别为13.47±10.65、42.8±33.46秒、42.58±16.38、202.25±71.28秒和97.14±36.86毫升）（P<0.01），尤其是在较高等级的白内障中。使用新型探头的2例患者发生了前囊撕开边缘撕裂。两组均未发生角膜烧伤。术后1个月时，平均内皮细胞损失和CCT的百分比变化无显著差异。
新型平衡型探头进行超声乳化更高效，尤其是在需要更高能量和更长超声乳化时间的硬核白内障中。
