• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与传统超声乳化术在采用扭转模式时对内皮细胞密度的比较

Comparison of Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery and Conventional Phacoemulsification on Endothelial Cell Density When Using Torsional Modality.

作者信息

Oka Yoshitaka, Sasaki Noriyuki, Injev Valentine P

机构信息

Senshinkai Eye Institute, Iizuka-shi, Japan.

Alcon Japan Ltd., Tokyo, Japan.

出版信息

Clin Ophthalmol. 2021 Oct 20;15:4227-4237. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S329935. eCollection 2021.

DOI:10.2147/OPTH.S329935
PMID:34707342
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8542738/
Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the effects of femtosecond laser assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) and manual phacoemulsification on cumulative dissipated energy (CDE), torsional amplitude, and endothelial cell density (ECD).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective, randomized study was conducted at Oka Eye Clinic (Fukuoka, Japan). Surgeries were performed using FLACS (with LenSx) or conventional technique in adults ≥20 years with grade 2-4 cataracts. Visits included preoperative, surgery day, and 5 postoperative visits (days 1, 4-10, 20-40, 60-120, and 150-210). Primary endpoint was CDE. Secondary endpoints included ECD percent change at day 150-210 versus preoperative visit and average torsional amplitude on surgery day. Exploratory endpoints included central corneal thickness and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). Superiority of FLACS to conventional technique was evaluated using t-tests based on a mixed model for repeated measures.

RESULTS

Full analysis set included 53 eyes per group. Mean cataract grade was 2.92±0.58 in FLACS and 2.94±0.57 in conventional group. FLACS versus conventional method had significantly lower mean CDE (0.213±0.334 versus 1.718±0.898%-seconds, respectively; <0.0001), demonstrating superiority of FLACS. Low endothelial cell loss (ECL) was achieved with both FLACS and conventional methods (1.5±5.6% and 2.7±5.2%; =0.260). Torsional amplitude was significantly lower for FLACS versus conventional method (19.6±16.0% versus 31.1±6.6%; <0.0001). Central corneal thickness was comparable for both methods at all visits except day 1; CDVA was comparable for both methods at all postoperative visits.

CONCLUSION

FLACS achieved significantly lower CDE compared with the conventional surgical method (<0.0001). Low ECL was achieved with both FLACS (1.5%) and conventional (2.7%) methods.

摘要

目的

比较飞秒激光辅助白内障手术(FLACS)与手法超声乳化术对累积能量消散(CDE)、扭转幅度和内皮细胞密度(ECD)的影响。

患者与方法

本前瞻性随机研究在冈眼科诊所(日本福冈)进行。对年龄≥20岁、白内障分级为2 - 4级的成年人采用FLACS(使用LenSx)或传统技术进行手术。随访包括术前、手术日以及术后5次随访(第1天、第4 - 10天、第20 - 40天、第60 - 120天和第150 - 210天)。主要终点是CDE。次要终点包括第150 - 210天与术前随访相比ECD的百分比变化以及手术日的平均扭转幅度。探索性终点包括中央角膜厚度和矫正远视力(CDVA)。基于重复测量的混合模型,使用t检验评估FLACS相对于传统技术的优越性。

结果

每组的完整分析集包括53只眼。FLACS组白内障平均分级为2.92±0.58,传统组为2.94±0.57。与传统方法相比,FLACS的平均CDE显著更低(分别为0.213±0.334与1.718±0.898%-秒;<0.0001),表明FLACS具有优越性。FLACS和传统方法均实现了低内皮细胞损失(ECL)(分别为1.5±5.6%和2.7±5.2%;P = 0.260)。与传统方法相比,FLACS的扭转幅度显著更低(19.6±16.0%与31.1±6.6%;<0.0001)。除第1天外,两种方法在所有随访时的中央角膜厚度相当;两种方法在所有术后随访时的CDVA相当。

结论

与传统手术方法相比,FLACS的CDE显著更低(<0.0001)。FLACS(1.5%)和传统方法(2.7%)均实现了低ECL。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/e2eefd5d7ac0/OPTH-15-4227-g0008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/9acca320ab7b/OPTH-15-4227-g0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/c4304ec4dce9/OPTH-15-4227-g0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/9306131af737/OPTH-15-4227-g0003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/9a74e963ef17/OPTH-15-4227-g0004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/d0c45e06d794/OPTH-15-4227-g0005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/a586d6a51ea3/OPTH-15-4227-g0006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/8ef0988f19ff/OPTH-15-4227-g0007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/e2eefd5d7ac0/OPTH-15-4227-g0008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/9acca320ab7b/OPTH-15-4227-g0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/c4304ec4dce9/OPTH-15-4227-g0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/9306131af737/OPTH-15-4227-g0003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/9a74e963ef17/OPTH-15-4227-g0004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/d0c45e06d794/OPTH-15-4227-g0005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/a586d6a51ea3/OPTH-15-4227-g0006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/8ef0988f19ff/OPTH-15-4227-g0007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/42a2/8542738/e2eefd5d7ac0/OPTH-15-4227-g0008.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparison of Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery and Conventional Phacoemulsification on Endothelial Cell Density When Using Torsional Modality.飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与传统超声乳化术在采用扭转模式时对内皮细胞密度的比较
Clin Ophthalmol. 2021 Oct 20;15:4227-4237. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S329935. eCollection 2021.
2
Comparison of clinical outcomes between femtosecond laser-assisted versus conventional phacoemulsification.飞秒激光辅助与传统超声乳化白内障吸除术临床疗效的比较。
Eye Vis (Lond). 2018 Apr 23;5:8. doi: 10.1186/s40662-018-0102-5. eCollection 2018.
3
Differences in energy and corneal endothelium between femtosecond laser-assisted and conventional cataract surgeries: prospective, intraindividual, randomized controlled trial.飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与传统白内障手术在能量和角膜内皮方面的差异:前瞻性、个体内、随机对照试验。
Int J Ophthalmol. 2018 Aug 18;11(8):1308-1316. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2018.08.10. eCollection 2018.
4
Comparison of clinical outcomes between femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus conventional phacoemulsification in vitrectomized eyes - A prospective interventional study.玻璃体切割术后的飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与传统超声乳化白内障吸除术的临床疗效比较-一项前瞻性干预研究。
Indian J Ophthalmol. 2024 Sep 1;72(9):1285-1290. doi: 10.4103/IJO.IJO_1804_23. Epub 2024 May 20.
5
Safety and efficacy of cataract surgery performed with a low-energy femtosecond laser compared with conventional phacoemulsification in Chinese patients: a randomized clinical trial.在中国患者中,低能量飞秒激光白内障手术与传统超声乳化白内障手术相比的安全性和有效性:一项随机临床试验。
Eye Vis (Lond). 2023 Jul 2;10(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s40662-023-00347-0.
6
Can we improve the efficacy of modern cataract surgery by using different tip designs? A comparison of balanced and tapered tip in femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery and manual phacoemulsification.我们能否通过使用不同的尖端设计来提高现代白内障手术的疗效?飞秒激光辅助白内障手术和手动超声乳化术中平衡尖端与锥形尖端的比较。
Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2018 Jan;46(1):35-45. doi: 10.1111/ceo.12998. Epub 2017 Jun 22.
7
Comparison of cumulative dispersed energy (CDE) in femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) and conventional phacoemulsification.飞秒激光辅助白内障手术(FLACS)与传统超声乳化白内障吸除术中累积离散能量(CDE)的比较。
Int Ophthalmol. 2019 Aug;39(8):1761-1766. doi: 10.1007/s10792-018-0996-x. Epub 2018 Jul 27.
8
Comparison of cumulative dispersed energy between conventional phacoemulsification and femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery with two different lens fragmentation patterns.比较两种不同晶状体粉碎模式的传统超声乳化白内障吸除术与飞秒激光辅助白内障手术的累积弥散能量。
Lasers Med Sci. 2022 Mar;37(2):843-848. doi: 10.1007/s10103-021-03321-1. Epub 2021 Apr 19.
9
Comparison of Corneal Endothelial Cell Loss Between Two Femtosecond Laser Platforms and Standard Phacoemulsification.两种飞秒激光平台与标准超声乳化术之间角膜内皮细胞丢失的比较
J Refract Surg. 2017 Oct 1;33(10):708-712. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20170731-01.
10
Endothelial cell loss and refractive predictability in femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery compared with conventional cataract surgery.与传统白内障手术相比,飞秒激光辅助白内障手术中的内皮细胞丢失和屈光可预测性。
Acta Ophthalmol. 2014 Nov;92(7):617-22. doi: 10.1111/aos.12406. Epub 2014 Jun 2.

引用本文的文献

1
Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus conventional phacoemulsification cataract surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与传统超声乳化白内障手术:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析
Sci Rep. 2025 Jul 29;15(1):27569. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-13174-1.
2
One-year longitudinal study of corneal changes after different vitrectomy procedures using confocal microscopy.使用共聚焦显微镜对不同玻璃体切割术后角膜变化的一年纵向研究。
Sci Rep. 2025 Feb 12;15(1):5201. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-86375-3.
3
An exploration of safe and efficient nucleus fragmentation strategies for femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery in short axial length patients.

本文引用的文献

1
Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery Versus Phacoemulsification Cataract Surgery (FACT): A Randomized Noninferiority Trial.飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与超声乳化白内障手术的比较(FACT):一项随机非劣效性试验。
Ophthalmology. 2020 Aug;127(8):1012-1019. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.02.028. Epub 2020 Mar 3.
2
Comparison of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery and conventional cataract surgery: a meta-analysis and systematic review.飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与常规白内障手术的比较:荟萃分析和系统评价。
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2020 Aug;46(8):1075-1085. doi: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000228.
3
A randomized controlled trial comparing femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus conventional phacoemulsification surgery.
短眼轴患者飞秒激光辅助白内障手术安全有效的核碎裂策略探索。
BMC Ophthalmol. 2024 Dec 27;24(1):550. doi: 10.1186/s12886-024-03822-x.
4
Safety of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus conventional phacoemulsification for cataract: A meta-analysis and systematic review.飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与传统白内障超声乳化手术的安全性比较:一项荟萃分析与系统评价
Adv Ophthalmol Pract Res. 2022 Feb 11;2(1):100027. doi: 10.1016/j.aopr.2022.100027. eCollection 2022 May-Jun.
5
Laser-assisted cataract surgery versus standard ultrasound phacoemulsification cataract surgery.激光辅助白内障手术与标准超声乳化白内障手术的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Jun 23;6(6):CD010735. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010735.pub3.
6
Comparison of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery and conventional phacoemulsification on corneal impact: A meta-analysis and systematic review.飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与传统超声乳化白内障吸除术对角膜影响的比较:Meta 分析和系统评价。
PLoS One. 2023 Apr 14;18(4):e0284181. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0284181. eCollection 2023.
7
Corneal Endothelial Characteristics in Normal Chinese Han Children and Youngsters: A Study from the Specular Microscopy Descriptions.《正常中国汉族儿童和青少年的角膜内皮特征:一项来自共焦显微镜描述的研究》。
Dis Markers. 2022 May 20;2022:5338725. doi: 10.1155/2022/5338725. eCollection 2022.
随机对照试验比较飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与传统超声乳化白内障吸除术。
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2019 Jan;45(1):11-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2018.08.033. Epub 2018 Nov 7.
4
Comparison of cumulative dispersed energy (CDE) in femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) and conventional phacoemulsification.飞秒激光辅助白内障手术(FLACS)与传统超声乳化白内障吸除术中累积离散能量(CDE)的比较。
Int Ophthalmol. 2019 Aug;39(8):1761-1766. doi: 10.1007/s10792-018-0996-x. Epub 2018 Jul 27.
5
Comparison of clinical outcomes between femtosecond laser-assisted versus conventional phacoemulsification.飞秒激光辅助与传统超声乳化白内障吸除术临床疗效的比较。
Eye Vis (Lond). 2018 Apr 23;5:8. doi: 10.1186/s40662-018-0102-5. eCollection 2018.
6
Effect of high-vacuum setting on phacoemulsification efficiency.高真空设置对超声乳化效率的影响。
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017 Sep;43(9):1135-1139. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.09.001.
7
Differences in energy expenditure for conventional and femtosecond-assisted cataract surgery using 2 different phacoemulsification systems.使用两种不同超声乳化系统的传统白内障手术和飞秒激光辅助白内障手术的能量消耗差异。
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017 Jan;43(1):16-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.11.037.
8
Cataract Surgical Rate and Socioeconomics: A Global Study.白内障手术率与社会经济学:一项全球研究。
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2016 Nov 1;57(14):5872-5881. doi: 10.1167/iovs.16-19894.
9
Comparative evaluation of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery and conventional phacoemulsification in white cataract.飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与传统超声乳化白内障吸除术治疗白色白内障的对比评估
Clin Ophthalmol. 2016 Jul 22;10:1357-64. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S108243. eCollection 2016.
10
Efficacy and Safety of Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery Compared with Manual Cataract Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of 14 567 Eyes.飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与手动白内障手术的疗效和安全性比较:14567 只眼的荟萃分析。
Ophthalmology. 2016 Oct;123(10):2113-26. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.07.005. Epub 2016 Aug 15.