London 2014 Registration Visa Letters Programme Satellite Meetings Glaucoma Day 2014 Exhibition Hotel Booking Virtual Exhibition Star Alliance
london escrs

Course handouts are now available
Click here


Come to London

video-icon

WATCH to find out why


Site updates:

Programme Updates. Programme Overview and - Video Symposium on Challenging Cases now available.


Posters

Search Abstracts by author or title
(results will display both Free Papers & Poster)

Effect of aspiration of viscoelastic device behind the intraocular lens with the I/A probe in cataract surgery

Poster Details

First Author: F.Aguirre SPAIN

Co Author(s):    P. Orts   J. Hueso           

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To compare surgical results after phacoemulsification between removal of viscoelastic device (OVD) by aspiration over the intraocular lens (IOL) (making vertical and horizontal displacements) and aspiration also placing the irrigation/aspiration probe (I/A) between the IOL optic and the posterior capsule.

Setting:

Ophthalmology, San Juan University Hospital. Alicante, Spain.

Methods:

A randomized prospective study was conducted on 77 patients who underwent cataract surgery. In the first group (41 eyes), OVD was removed over the optic, displacing the retropseudophakic OVD by little abrupt horizontal and vertical displacements of the IOL. In the second group (40 eyes) OVD was removed by placing the I/A probe behind the IOL with the aspiration port facing anteriorly. Intraocular pressure (IOP), intraocular lens position (IOLP) and refraction were analyzed over the first six weeks in both groups.

Results:

Both groups were similar according to axial length, corneal keratometry, intraocular lens, age, sex, spherical equivalent and anterior chamber depth. IOP, refraction and IOLP results were similar after surgery, and no statistical differences were founded. Refractive change along the firsts six weeks was 0.33 in the first group (removal only over the IOL) and 0.28 diopters in the second group (P=0.38). IOLP change along the firsts six weeks was 0.18mm in the first group and 0.11 mm in the second. This difference was close to reach a statistical difference (P=0.057). No complication was reported with this maneuver.

Conclusions:

Aspirating OVD behind the IOL appears to be a safe maneuver but has not offered any advantage. According to our results, displacing the retropseudophakic OVD by little movements over the IOL has been enough to avoid secondary postoperative intraocular pressure spikes. Refractive and IOLP results and shifts over the postoperative first six weeks did not seem different.

Financial Disclosure:

NONE

Back to Poster listing