Comparison of patient experiences and clinical outcomes between an illuminated chopper and a conventional chopper under a surgical microscope.

PURPOSE: To compare patient experiences and cooperation and the clinical outcomes illuminated chopper vs conventional chopper during cataract surgery.

SETTING

4 tertiary institutions in Korea.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, paired-eye, controlled pilot study.

METHODS

152 eyes of 76 patients who underwent bilateral cataract surgeries were enrolled in this study. The surgical method was randomly assigned to each patient's eye (1 eye using the illuminated chopper with a light source and the other using the conventional chopper under the microscope light). Patient suffering scores (the degree of strong light perception, glare, inability to fixate, anxiety, discomfort, and fear) from 0 to 10 (10 being the most severe level); cooperation score from 0 to 3 (3 being the best cooperation); operating time; and corneal endothelial cell density (ECD) preoperatively and postoperatively were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

The mean patient suffering score of all 6 parameters in the iChopper group was significantly smaller than those in the control group (all P < .05). The mean patient cooperation score of the iChopper group (2.3 ± 0.8) was significantly greater than that of the control (1.6 ± 0.9; P < .001). There was no significant difference in the mean operating time and corneal ECD at each visit between the groups, albeit the mean corneal ECD was significantly decreased from baseline to 1 month after cataract surgery in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Phacoemulsification using the illuminated chopper provides less glare and anxiety and better cooperation during cataract surgery without increasing the operating time and damaging corneal endothelium compared with the conventional chopper.