These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Safety and efficacy of phacoemulsification compared with manual small-incision cataract surgery by a randomized controlled clinical trial: six-week results.
    Author: Gogate PM, Kulkarni SR, Krishnaiah S, Deshpande RD, Joshi SA, Palimkar A, Deshpande MD.
    Journal: Ophthalmology; 2005 May; 112(5):869-74. PubMed ID: 15878068.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, safety, and refractive errors of astigmatism after cataract surgery by phacoemulsification and manual small-incision cataract surgery techniques. DESIGN: Masked randomized control clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred eyes of 400 patients, 1:1 randomization with half in each arm of the trial. METHODS: A total of 400 eyes was assigned randomly to either phacoemulsification or small-incision groups after informed consent and were operated on by 4 surgeons. They were masked to the technique of surgery before, during, and after cataract surgery and followed up to 1 year after surgery. The intraoperative and postoperative complications, uncorrected and best-corrected visual acuity, and astigmatism were recorded at 1 and 6 weeks postoperatively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of patients achieving visual acuity better than or equal to 6/18 with and without spectacles after cataract surgery in the operated eye up to 6 weeks, postoperative astigmatism, and complications during and after surgery. RESULTS: This article reports clinical outcomes up to 6 weeks. Three hundred eighty-three of 400 (95.75%) patients completed the 1-week follow-up, and 372 of 400 (93%) patients completed the 6-week follow-up. One hundred thirty-one of 192 (68.2%) patients in the phacoemulsification group and 117 of 191 (61.25%) patients in the small-incision group had uncorrected visual acuity better than or equal to 6/18 at 1 week (P = 0.153). One hundred fifty of 185 (81.08%) patients of the phacoemulsification group and 133 of 187 (71.1%) patients of the small-incision group (P = 0.038) were better than or equal to 6/18 at the 6-week follow-up for presenting visual activity. Visual acuity improved to > or = 6/18 with best correction in 182 of 185 patients (98.4%) and 184 of 187 (98.4%) patients (P = 0.549), respectively. Poor outcome (postoperative visual acuity < 6/60) was noted in 1 of 185 (0.5%) in the phacoemulsification group and none in the small-incision group. The mode of astigmatism was 0.5 diopters (D) for the phacoemulsification group and 1.5 D for the small-incision group, and the average astigmatism was 1.1 D and 1.2 D, respectively. There was an intra-surgeon variation in astigmatism. The phacoemulsification group had 7 posterior capsular rents compared with 12 in the small-incision group, but the phacoemulsification group had more corneal edema on the first postoperative day. CONCLUSIONS: Both the phacoemulsification and the small-incision techniques are safe and effective for visual rehabilitation of cataract patients, although phacoemulsification gives better uncorrected visual acuity in a larger proportion of patients at 6 weeks.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]