Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025
Comparison of Ultrasound Energy Delivered to the Anterior Segment Across Different Phacoemulsification Surgical Platforms.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Nelson Tanner K, Ricks Reiker G, Cardenas Ivan A, Whitaker Tyler, Jensen Jenna L, Olson Randall J, Pettey Jeff H
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to use calorimetry to understand the difference in energy transferred by three phacoemulsification surgical platforms to the eye.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A phacoemulsification tip was lowered into a double-walled calorimeter filled with distilled water. The foot pedal was depressed for 30 seconds and the change in temperature of the water was measured by a temperature probe. Three phacoemulsification systems were compared: the Alcon Centurion, Johnson & Johnson Veritas and Oertli CataRhex 3. The following conditions remained constant across trials and platforms: continuous longitudinal ultrasound, flow rate 12mL/min, vacuum 0mmHg, and clamped inflow and outflow tubing. The different platforms were directly compared at 20%, 40%, 60%, 80% and 100% power.
RESULTS: A two-way ANOVA found a significant difference (P < 0.001) in overall energy output across all trials between the CataRhex 3, Centurion and Veritas with an F value of 63.97 and two degrees of freedom.
CONCLUSION: Given identical settings, the amount of energy produced was significantly different across phacoemulsification platforms. This data can aid surgeons' understanding of how power level by surgical platform can impact the amount of energy introduced into the anterior segment during cataract surgery.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A phacoemulsification tip was lowered into a double-walled calorimeter filled with distilled water. The foot pedal was depressed for 30 seconds and the change in temperature of the water was measured by a temperature probe. Three phacoemulsification systems were compared: the Alcon Centurion, Johnson & Johnson Veritas and Oertli CataRhex 3. The following conditions remained constant across trials and platforms: continuous longitudinal ultrasound, flow rate 12mL/min, vacuum 0mmHg, and clamped inflow and outflow tubing. The different platforms were directly compared at 20%, 40%, 60%, 80% and 100% power.
RESULTS: A two-way ANOVA found a significant difference (P < 0.001) in overall energy output across all trials between the CataRhex 3, Centurion and Veritas with an F value of 63.97 and two degrees of freedom.
CONCLUSION: Given identical settings, the amount of energy produced was significantly different across phacoemulsification platforms. This data can aid surgeons' understanding of how power level by surgical platform can impact the amount of energy introduced into the anterior segment during cataract surgery.