Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2015
Effect of pulsing ultrasound on phacoemulsification efficiency.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gardiner Gareth L, Garff Kevin, Gupta Isha, Kramer Gregory D, Farukhi M Aabid, Stagg Brian C, Zaugg Brian, Olson Randall J
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate pulse type technology used to remove lens fragments during phacoemulsification.
SETTING: John A. Moran Eye Center Laboratories, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
DESIGN: Experimental study.
METHODS: Lens nuclei soaked in 10 mL of 10% neutral buffered formalin for 2 hours were placed in 10 mL of balanced salt solution. Lenses were cut into 2 mm × 2 mm cubes; no more than 36 hours later, cubes were randomly selected for testing. Two aspiration and 2 vacuum settings were assessed at moderate- and high-flow and vacuum (30 mL/min and 300 mm/Hg, low-flow vacuum; 50 mL/min and 500 mm/Hg, high-flow vacuum), with continuous 50 milliseconds on and off (long pulse) and 6 milliseconds on and off (micropulse) ultrasound.
RESULTS: There was a significant difference in efficiency favoring micropulse compared with combined long pulse and continuous pulse in high-flow vacuum at 80% power (P = .018) and between combined long pulse and continuous pulse versus micropulse in high-flow vacuum at 20% power (P = .019). Low-flow vacuum micropulse was more efficient than continuous (19.7%) (P < .0001) and long pulse (22.7%) (P < .0001). Continuous and long pulses were not significantly different from one other. There was a significant difference in chatter rates between high-flow vacuum and low-flow vacuum when all results were compared (P < .0001), with no additional significant differences found.
CONCLUSION: Micropulse technology was better than continuous and long pulse at moderate but not high-flow and vacuum settings. At the higher setting, chatter was observed less often, with all modalities more efficient than the lower setting.
SETTING: John A. Moran Eye Center Laboratories, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
DESIGN: Experimental study.
METHODS: Lens nuclei soaked in 10 mL of 10% neutral buffered formalin for 2 hours were placed in 10 mL of balanced salt solution. Lenses were cut into 2 mm × 2 mm cubes; no more than 36 hours later, cubes were randomly selected for testing. Two aspiration and 2 vacuum settings were assessed at moderate- and high-flow and vacuum (30 mL/min and 300 mm/Hg, low-flow vacuum; 50 mL/min and 500 mm/Hg, high-flow vacuum), with continuous 50 milliseconds on and off (long pulse) and 6 milliseconds on and off (micropulse) ultrasound.
RESULTS: There was a significant difference in efficiency favoring micropulse compared with combined long pulse and continuous pulse in high-flow vacuum at 80% power (P = .018) and between combined long pulse and continuous pulse versus micropulse in high-flow vacuum at 20% power (P = .019). Low-flow vacuum micropulse was more efficient than continuous (19.7%) (P < .0001) and long pulse (22.7%) (P < .0001). Continuous and long pulses were not significantly different from one other. There was a significant difference in chatter rates between high-flow vacuum and low-flow vacuum when all results were compared (P < .0001), with no additional significant differences found.
CONCLUSION: Micropulse technology was better than continuous and long pulse at moderate but not high-flow and vacuum settings. At the higher setting, chatter was observed less often, with all modalities more efficient than the lower setting.