Clinical results of phacoemulsification with the use of Healon5 or Viscoat

Thickness of the Protective Layers of Different Ophthalmic Viscosurgical Devices During Lens Surgery in a Porcine Model

Purpose

To evaluate the thickness of the intraoperative layers of 10 different ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVD) covering the corneal endothelium during simulated lens surgery in a porcine model.

Methods

This experimental study took place at the Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Austria. Ten OVDs with different viscoelastic properties (ProVisc, Z-Hyalin plus, Amvisc plus, DisCoVisc, Healon EndoCoat, Viscoat, Z-Hyalcoat, Combivisc, Duo-Visc, and Twinvisc) were assessed in 10 porcine eyes each, yielding a total of 100 eyes. Simulated cataract surgery was performed with volumetric intraoperative OCT imaging during phacoemulsification and during irrigation/aspiration to determine the remaining amount of OVD coating the endothelium over a scan field of 6 × 6 mm. Indirect visualization of the OVD was enabled by replacing the irrigating solution by a higher scattering diluted milk solution. A deep convolutional neural network (CNN) was used to evaluate OVD layer thickness based on the B-scans.

Results

Median thickness values after phacoemulsification were lowest for the cohesive OVDs Z-Hyalin plus (38 µm) and ProVisc (39 µm), followed by the combination systems Twinvisc (342 µm) and Duo-Visc (537 µm). Highest values were observed for the dispersive OVDs and the combination system Combivisc (Viscoat: 957 µm; Z-Hyalcoat: 988 µm, Combivisc: 1042 µm; Amvisc plus: 1259 µm; Healon EndoCoat: 1303 µm; DisCoVisc: 1356 µm). The difference between the OVDs was statistically significant (P < 0.01).

Conclusions

The results of this study confirm that at completion of phacoemulsification, thickest residual layers of OVD remain when using dispersive substances, followed by combination systems and lowest thickness values were observed with cohesive OVDs. The use of an intraoperative OCT and a deep convolutional neural network allowed measurements over a large scan field of 6 × 6 mm and a precise evaluation of the OVD layer coating the corneal endothelium. The OVD layer seemed to be more like a ragged terrain instead of a flat layer, indicating that the film-forming effect of dispersive OVDs is the result of their volume rheology rather than a surface interaction.

Translational Relevance

Evaluating the protective properties provides valuable insights into how different OVDs with different viscoelastic properties form layers beneath the corneal endothelium and helps to understand their persistence during the various steps of cataract surgeries.

Corneal endothelial damage in phacoemulsification using an anterior chamber maintainer compared with using an ophthalmic viscosurgical device

PURPOSE

To compare the effects of phacoemulsification surgery (PE) using an anterior chamber maintainer (ACM) and conventional PE using an ophthalmic viscosurgical device (OVD) on corneal endothelial cells.

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, Celal Bayar University, Manisa, Turkey.

DESIGN

Prospective randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Eyes in the OVD group (n = 50) underwent conventional PE, whereas eyes in the ACM group (n = 50) underwent PE using an ACM. Endothelial cell density (ECD), coefficient of variation (CV), hexagonality (HEX), and noncontact central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements were performed by specular microscopy before and at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after PE.

RESULTS

This study included 100 eyes of 97 patients undergoing PE. The mean age was 64.7 ± 10.6 years in the OVD group, 64.0 ± 12.6 years in the ACM group (P > .05). The groups did not differ significantly in preoperative ECD, CV, HEX, and CCT or total PE time (P > .05 for all). ECD was significantly lower in the ACM group compared with the OVD group at postoperative 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months (P = .002, P = .002, and P = .001, respectively). Similarly, ECD loss compared with preoperative value was greater in the ACM group at all postoperative timepoints (P = .003, P = .001, and P = .001, respectively). CV increased and HEX decreased in both groups postoperatively (P > .05 for both). CCT showed a transient increase of less than 10 μm at postoperative 1 month in both groups (P = .296).

CONCLUSIONS

PE with ACM was associated with greater corneal ECD loss compared with conventional PE. ACM should not be used during PE in patients with limited corneal endothelial reserve.

A primer on ocular viscosurgical devices

PURPOSE

To provide pharmacists with an overview of ocular viscosurgical devices (OVDs) and a comprehensive resource describing characteristics of commercially available agents.

SUMMARY

OVDs are substances that are injected into the eye during ophthalmic procedures, such as cataract surgery, to reduce injury to the endothelium that may result from surgical manipulation. Currently available OVDs are composed of one or more of the following active ingredients: sodium hyaluronate, sodium chondroitin sulfate, and hydroxypropylmethylcellulose. Rheologic properties of OVDs, such as viscosity, elasticity, pseudoplasticity, and cohesion, affect the products' function and performance. Based on rheologic properties, OVDs can be generally classified as cohesive or dispersive. Given each products' unique characteristics, OVDs are not interchangeable. An understanding of OVD characteristics and role in practice allows for improved product selection, which varies based on patient characteristics and procedure. Availability of OVD information and literature is generally lacking since OVDs are regulated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as medical devices. This primer includes an overview of relevant ophthalmic surgical practices and the landscape of comparative efficacy and safety literature to assist in formulary decision-making. This review also provides a comprehensive guide to commercially available OVDs and a discussion on practical considerations for the pharmacist.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacists may be tasked with handling OVDs in institutional settings. Knowledge about OVD rheologic properties, product characteristics, role in practice, and available literature is necessary for managing formularies and ensuring optimal product selection.

A Novel Marking Technique for Descemet Membrane Endothelial Graft Using an Ophthalmic Viscoelastic Device

PURPOSE

To describe the viscoelastic marking technique, a novel marking technique of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) grafts that enables usage of a single donor cornea for 2 surgeries-one that uses Descemet membrane and endothelium (DMEK) and the other using the stroma and Bowman layer.

METHODS

A retrospective case analysis was performed on 26 eyes of 26 consecutive patients who underwent DMEK using the "viscoelastic marking technique." In this novel technique, an ophthalmic viscoelastic device (Healon 5) is placed over the endothelial side. Descemet membrane is then folded in half over the ophthalmic viscoelastic device with the stromal side up, and the F mark is drawn on the stromal side of the folded Descemet membrane. Primary outcome was best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, and secondary outcomes included graft detachment and rebubble rate, graft failure, and endothelial cell density.

RESULTS

Mean best spectacle-corrected visual acuity improved significantly from 1.0 ± 0.7 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (LogMAR) before the surgery to 0.9 ± 0.7 LogMAR, 0.5 ± 0.6 LogMAR, 0.4 ± 0.2 LogMAR, and 0.4 ± 0.4 LogMAR at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery, respectively. Seven eyes (27%) had partial graft detachment that required air injection. Primary failure occurred in 3 eyes (11%). There were no free-floating donors or recognized inverted donors. The endothelial cell density loss at 12 months after surgery was a cell-loss rate of 38.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

The viscoelastic marking technique is a simple, approachable, and safe technique for marking DMEK grafts while preserving the anterior cornea for additional surgery.

Effects of Combinations of Ophthalmic Viscosurgical Devices and Suction Flow Rates on the Corneal Endothelial Cell Damage Incurred during Phacoemulsification

We examined the effects of different ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs) and suction flow rates during phacoemulsification on the amount of ultrasound power used and damage to the corneal endothelium. In total, 48 eyes of 24 patients who underwent phacoemulsification and intraocular lens insertion with different OVD settings in the left and right eye between February and August 2018 were examined retrospectively from medical records. Each of the following types of OVDs was used in either the right or left eye of each patient: a viscoadaptive OVD (V group) or a combination of dispersive and cohesive OVDs (soft-shell technique; S group). There was no significant difference in the lens nucleus hardness between the two groups. A 2.4 mm transconjunctival scleral incision was made, and phacoemulsification was performed by the same surgeon. The cumulative dissipated energy (CDE) and ultrasound time intraoperatively were compared between the two groups. The CDE was significantly larger in the V group (9.9 ± 4.6) than the S group (6.4 ± 3.0; p=0.006). The reduction rate of the endothelial cell density at the center of the cornea was significantly higher in the V group (4.1% ± 6.7%) than the S group (0.3% ± 4.5%; p=0.03) at 1 week postoperatively. Both groups had a good postoperative course. There was less corneal endothelial damage with the soft-shell technique combined with a normal flow setting than the viscoadaptive OVD combined with a low flow setting.

A new histological evaluation method to detect residual ophthalmic viscosurgical devices for cataract surgery

Purpose

To establish a new evaluation method to quantify residual ophthalmic viscosurgical device (OVD) volume and corneal endothelium adhesion properties for phacoemulsification surgery.

Methods

We compared the performance of four OVDs (Viscoat®, Healon5®, Healon® and DisCoVisc®) using porcine eyes. First, OVDs were mixed with fluorescent-conjugated dextrans to render them visible under the microscope. A corneal side port was opened, followed by a continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis, and a corneal tunnel incision was made. OVDs were injected, then the lens was removed using one-handed phacoemulsification. After this procedure, the anterior segment of the eye was isolated via an equatorial incision and the tissue was immediately frozen in shimmering liquid nitrogen. Sagittal slices (20 μm) were cut with a Cryostat from limbus to limbus. Every tenth slide was imaged using a fluorescent microscope with a CCD camera. We evaluated the percentage of the corneal endothelium covered by each OVD as the OVD adhesion to corneal endothelium ratio (OAE ratio) and the volume of residual OVD in the anterior chamber.

Results

Viscoat® showed significantly higher endothelium coverage compared with both Healon® and DisCoVisc®. A statistically larger volume of Healon5® remained in the anterior chamber compared with Healon® and DisCoVisc®.

Conclusion

The new evaluation methods used here provide precise quantitative analysis of OAE ratio and residual OVD volume. These results show that Viscoat® and Healon5® have a high potential for coating the corneal endothelium during phacoemulsification and aspiration surgery.

Safety of Polyacrylamide 1.5% Left in Anterior Chamber in Combined Phacoemulsification and Pars Plana Vitrectomy Surgery

PURPOSE

To evaluate safety, efficacy and postoperative characteristics of polyacrylamide 1.5% ophthalmic viscosurgical device (OVD) left in anterior chamber during and at the end of combined phacoemulsification and pars plana vitrectomy surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective study comprised 20 eyes that received combined phacoemulsification and pars plana vitrectomy performed by the same surgeon. Polyacrylamide 1.5% was left in anterior chamber at the end of the surgery. Preoperative and postoperative examinations (4, 12 and 24 hours; 14 days; 1 and 3 months) included measurement of intraocular pressure (IOP), central corneal thickness (CCT), endothelial cell density and assessment of any ocular adverse reactions.

RESULTS

Four of the 20 patients (20%) showed increased IOP at hours postoperatively and needed medical treatment for IOP control. There was no significant difference in IOP between the preoperative visit and postoperative 3 months (p > 0.05). CCT measurements were similar between preoperative and postoperative visits (p > 0.05). A mean endothelial cell density loss of 6.7% was observed at postoperative day 14, however there was no change after this visit.

CONCLUSION

Polyacrylamide 1.5% is safe, well-tolerated and protective in eyes undergoing combined phacoemulsification and pars plana vitrectomy.

Prefilled syringes and usability of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices

Purpose

To examine the influence of the configuration of prefilled syringes on the usability of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs).

Setting

Department of Ophthalmology, Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.

Design

Experimental study.

Methods

The maximum force needed to extrude the whole OVD (extrusion force) was compared among viscous cohesive OVDs (OPEGAN Hi^® 0.85 mL and Healon^® 0.85 mL) and very low viscosity dispersive OVDs (OPEGAN^® 0.6 mL and OPEGAN^® 1.1 mL). Additionally, to exclude the influence of any differences between syringes of viscous cohesive OVDs on the extrusion force, empty syringes of the same configuration were refilled with the same products. In addition, the syringe inner surface and that of the piston attached to the tip of the plunger were measured.

Results

The extrusion force of Healon 0.85 mL (3.28±0.19 kgf) was significantly (P<0.01) higher than that of OPEGAN Hi 0.85 mL (2.54±0.23 kgf). The inner syringe chamber for Healon 0.85 mL was vial shaped and had a built-in needle in the Luer tip, which was clearly different from OPEGAN Hi 0.85 mL. There were no significant differences in the extrusion force between refilled syringes. The extrusion force of OPEGAN 1.1 mL (3.44±0.12 kgf) was significantly (P<0.01) higher than that of OPEGAN 0.6 mL (1.63±0.06 kgf). The syringe of OPEGAN 1.1 mL was obviously bigger than that of OPEGAN 0.6 mL.

Conclusion

It was confirmed that the configuration of the syringes is another determinant of the extrusion force and a factor related to the difference in usability among products that meet the same cohesive class.

A clinical comparison between DisCoVisc and 2% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose in phacoemulsification: a fellow eye study

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to compare the effects and outcomes of two ophthalmic viscosurgical devices, 1.6% hyaluronic acid/4.0% chondroitin sulfate and 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose, during phacoemulsification.

METHODS

This prospective, randomized clinical trial comprised 78 eyes (39 patients) that received phacoemulsification performed by the same surgeon using a standardized technique. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 1.6% hyaluronic acid/4.0% chondroitin sulfate or 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose on the first eye. The other eye was treated later and received the other viscoelastic agent. Preoperative and postoperative examinations (5, 24 and 48 hours; 7 and 14 days; 3 and 6 months) included measurements of the total volume of the ophthalmic viscosurgical device, ultrasound and washout times to completely remove the ophthalmic viscosurgical device, intraocular pressure, central corneal thickness and best-corrected visual acuity. The corneal endothelial cell count was measured at baseline and at six months postoperatively. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01387620.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between groups in terms of cataract density or ultrasound time. However, it took longer to remove 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose than 1.6% hyaluronic acid/ 4.0% chondroitin sulfate, and the amount of viscoelastic material used was greater in the 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose group. In addition, the best-corrected visual acuity was significantly better in the hyaluronic acid/ chondroitin sulfate group, but this preferable outcome was only observed at 24 hours after the operation. There were no statistically significant differences between the two ophthalmic viscosurgical devices regarding the central corneal thickness or intraocular pressure measurements at any point in time. The corneal endothelial cell count was significantly higher in the hyaluronic acid/chondroitin sulfate group.

CONCLUSION

The ophthalmic viscosurgical device consisting of 1.6% hyaluronic acid/4.0% chondroitin sulfate was more efficient during phacoemulsification and was easier to remove after IOL implantation than 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose. In addition, the corneal endothelial cell count was significantly higher following the use of hyaluronic acid/chondroitin sulfate than with hydroxypropylmethylcellulose, which promoted an improved level of corneal endothelium protection.

Viscoat versus Visthesia during phacoemulsification cataract surgery: corneal and foveal changes

Background

Ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs) are widely used in phacoemulsification cataract surgery to maintain adequate intraocular space, stabilize ocular tissue during the operation and decrease the possible damage of the corneal endothelium. Our study has the purpose to compare the corneal and foveal changes of Viscoat and Visthesia in patients undergoing uneventful phacoemulsification cataract surgery.

Methods

Participants in our study were 77 consecutive patients, who were randomized into two groups based on type of OVD used during phacoemulsification: Viscoat or Visthesia. All patients underwent a complete ophthalmological examination i.e., measurement of best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) by means of Snellen charts, intraocular pressure examination by Goldmann tonometry, slit lamp examination, fundus examination, optical coherence tomography, specular microscopy and ultrasound pachymetry preoperatively and at three time points postoperatively (day 3, 15, 28 postoperatively). The differences in baseline characteristics, as well as in outcomes between the two groups were compared by Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test and Student's t-test, as appropriate.

Results

Intraoperatively, there was no statistically significant difference in the duration of the ultrasound application between the two groups, while Viscoat group needed more time for the operation performance. It is also worthy to mention that Visthesia group exhibited less intense pain than patients in Viscoat group. Postoperatively, there was a statistically significant difference in central corneal thickness, endothelial cell count and macular thickness between the two groups, but BCVA (logMAR) did not differ between the two groups.

Conclusions

Our study suggests that Viscoat is more safe and protective for the corneal endothelium during uneventful phacoemulsification cataract surgery, while Visthesia is in superior position regarding intraoperative pain. Patients of both groups acquired excellent visual acuity postoperative. Finally, this is the first study comparing OVDs in terms of macular thickness, finding that Visthesia cause a greater increase in macular thickness postoperatively than Viscoat, although it reaches normal ranges in both groups.

Uso de viscoelásticos na facoemulsificação em cães portadores de catarata: efeitos sobre a pressão intraocular, a morfologia das células endoteliais e a espessura corneana

Avaliaram-se as células endoteliais, a espessura corneana e a pressão intraocular (PIO) de cães portadores de catarata madura, empregando-se viscoelástico à base de hialuronato de sódio 3% e sulfato de condroitina 4% e hidroxipropilmetilcelulose 2%, utilizando-se 20 cães, distribuídos entre os dois grupos dos viscoelásticos. A técnica cirúrgica adotada foi a da facoemulsificação bimanual. As avaliações tonométricas foram efetuadas antes e após o ato cirúrgico, aos 1, 7, 14, 21, 28 e 60 dias de pós-operatório, e a microscopia especular, antes e após 7, 28 e 60 dias. Não houve diferença estatística entre os grupos quanto à PIO, com exceção aos 14 dias, em que se observou maior PIO com o uso de hialuronato de sódio 3% e sulfato de condroitina 4%. Não houve diferença entre os grupos quanto aos parâmetros relacionados ao endotélio, com diminuição discreta da densidade celular endotelial e aumento da área celular com a utilização de hidroxipropilmetilcelulose 2%. A utilização de ambos os dispositivos viscoelásticos analisados é recomendada para o procedimento de facoemulsificação em cães.

Intraocular pressure and endothelium cell counts after cataract surgery with chitosan and sodium hyaluronate (Healon GV): 3-year follow-up results of a randomised clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term effects of chitosan 0.1% and sodium hyaluronate 1.4% (Healon GV(R); Advanced Medical Optics, Santa Ana, CA, USA) on intraocular pressure (IOP) and endothelial cell loss.

METHODS

This randomised study comprised 140 eyes of 140 patients with age-related cataracts undergoing phacoemulsification followed by posterior chamber intraocular lens (IOL) implantation; 70 received chitosan 0.1%, and 70 received sodium hyaluronate 1.4%. The IOP was measured with standard Goldman applanation tonometry pre-operatively and 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 1 year and 3 years postoperatively. Endothelial cell counts were performed pre-operatively and 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 1 year and 3 years postoperatively using a Pro/Koester WFSCM contact endothelial microscope.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences found in postoperative IOP levels among the chitosan and sodium hyaluronate groups (P>0.05). No significant differences were found in postoperative mean endothelial cell counts at all time points between the chitosan and sodium hyaluronate groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Chitosan has the same effects as sodium hyaluronate on IOP and endothelium cells counts after cataract surgery and IOL implantation, and therefore may be an alternative ophthalmic viscoelastic device.

Combined panretinal photocoagulation and cataract surgery in a patient with diabetes mellitus

A case is presented whereby a simple method of applying indirect laser during cataract surgery in the presence of retinal and iris neovascularization is described. The method involves placing an infusion cannula into the anterior chamber following standard phacoemulsification and soft lens matter removal. The main section is then sutured and indirect laser is delivered to the far retinal periphery with gentle manipulation of the eye. Successful delivery of indirect panretinal photocoagulation despite inadvertent vitreous loss in this case demonstrates the advantages of its use. Other advantages, including its use in previously vitrectomized eyes and allowing manipulation/indentation of the eye, control of bleeding, and better visualization, are discussed.

Protective Effect of Viscoelastics against Retina Lipid Peroxidation

Viscoelastics or ophthalmic viscosurgical devices are routinely used during anterior segment surgery and also in posterior segment surgery. Studies of the harmful effects of phacoemulsification on corneal endothelial cells suggest that much of this damage is mediated by free radicals. In this study, we compare the possible effects against lipid peroxidation in the retina of three different viscoelastic substances: Viscoat, Healon and Visiol. Herein we demonstrate for the first time that viscoelastics are effective to protect the retina against lipid peroxidation, as can be seen by the slight increase of malondialdehyde in the homogenates incubated with viscoelastic exposed to light and to a temperature of 37 degrees C when compared with the control homogenates.

Alteration of free radical development by ophthalmic viscosurgical devices in phacoemulsification

PURPOSE

To determine the effect of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs) and irrigation/aspiration (I/A) settings on free radical development during phacoemulsification.

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, Nippon Medical School, Tokyo, Japan.

METHODS

Free radicals were detected by the electron spin resonance (ESR) spin-trap method. After a spin-trapping agent, 5,5-dimethyl-1-pyrroline N-oxide 1%, was mixed with the irrigating solution, phacoemulsification simulation was performed in an eye model at 100% ultrasound power levels for 10, 20, and 30 seconds. A high I/A setting (35 mL/min with 250 mm Hg vacuum) and a low I/A setting (15 mL/min with 60 mm Hg vacuum) were used in combination with no OVD, sodium hyaluronate 1% (Healon), sodium hyaluronate 2.3% (Healon5), sodium hyaluronate 3%-chondroitin sulfate 4% (Viscoat), or sodium hyaluronate 1% (Opegan). Immediately after phacoemulsification, the solution in the anterior chamber was collected and signals from the spin adduct were measured using an ESR spectrometer.

RESULTS

With the low setting, all OVDs significantly suppressed the signals for up to 20 seconds. At 30 seconds, the signals were still significantly smaller in all OVD groups, except Healon, than those in the no-OVD. With the high setting, the effect was not significant in the Healon and Opegan groups at 10 seconds; by 20 seconds and after, only Viscoat showed significant suppression.

CONCLUSIONS

Free radical development in phacoemulsification can be altered by OVD properties and I/A settings. To reduce oxidative stress to the corneal endothelium, attention should be paid to the retention of OVDs in the anterior chamber during phacoemulsification.

In vitro behavior of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices during phacoemulsification

PURPOSE

To evaluate the behavior and aspiration of several ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs) during phacoemulsification.

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, Tokyo Dental College Suidobashi Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.

METHODS

Cohesive OVDs (sodium hyaluronate 1.0% [Healon and Provisc]), dispersive OVDs (sodium hyaluronate 3.0%-chondroitin sulfate 4.0% [Viscoat]), and new-generation OVDs such as viscoadaptive (sodium hyaluronate 2.3% [Healon5]) and viscodispersive (hyaluronic acid 1.65%-chondroitin sulfate 4.0% [DisCoVisc]) OVDs, were stained with fluorescein sodium. The movement of the OVDs during simulated cataract surgery was recorded in porcine eyes under an operating microscope and with a side-view video camera. The initial and complete aspiration times of each OVD during phacoemulsification using 20 and 40 mL/min flow rates and sleeves and the removal times using the irrigation and aspiration (I/A) tip at the end of surgery were evaluated from the recorded videos.

RESULTS

The complete aspiration time of the cohesive OVDs was less than 3 seconds but up to 20 seconds with a low flow rate of 20 mL/min with a smaller sleeve. Other OVDs remained in the anterior chamber during phacoemulsification with both flow rates. The removal time for cohesive OVDs was less than 4 seconds and for new-generation OVDs, 10 to 15 seconds. The dispersive OVD required a significantly (P<.05) longer removal time than other OVDs.

CONCLUSIONS

Cohesive OVDs are removed easily during phacoemulsification; however, the aspiration rate can be affected by fluidics. New-generation OVDs, such as Healon5 and DisCoVisc, remained in the anterior chamber during phacoemulsification and were removed easily by I/A at the end of surgery. The behavior of these OVDs is preferable during phacoemulsification.

Retention and removal of a new viscous dispersive ophthalmic viscosurgical device during cataract surgery in animal eyes

AIMS

To assess the retention and removal properties of a new viscous dispersive ophthalmic viscosurgical device (OVD), DisCoVisc, in comparison with those of cohesive (Provisc), dispersive (Viscoat), and viscoadaptive (Healon5) OVDs.

METHODS

In 20 porcine eyes, cataract surgery was simulated using one of the four OVDs which were stained with fluorescein for better visualisation. Three parameters were measured. Firstly, the presence/absence of OVDs in the chamber at the completion of phacoemulsification was recorded. Secondly, the time until the OVDs were completely removed from the anterior chamber using the phaco needle was measured. Thirdly, after intraocular lens (IOL) implantation, the time needed to completely remove the OVDs from the chamber with irrigation/aspiration tip was recorded.

RESULTS

At the completion of phacoemulsification, the OVDs retained in 0% (0/5) for Provisc, 80% (4/5) for Healon5, 100% (5/5) for DisCoVisc, and 100% (5/5) for Viscoat. The retention of OVDs during phacoemulsification was greatest with Viscoat followed by, in descending order, DisCoVisc, Healon5, and Provisc. The removal of OVDs after IOL implantation took longest with Viscoat followed by Healon5, DisCoVisc, and Provisc.

CONCLUSION

The viscous dispersive DisCoVisc showed excellent retention during phacoemulsification, while its removal after IOL implantation was very easy. When compared with the viscoadaptive Healon5, DisCoVisc was retained better in the chamber and was easier to remove. These features of DisCoVisc should be highly advantageous when considering covering the entire cataract surgery procedure with a single OVD.

Change in intraocular pressure within 1 week of phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation using Adatocel

PURPOSE

To examine the change in intraocular pressure (IOP) within 1 week of phacoemulsification and foldable posterior chamber intraocular lens (PC IOL) implantation using Adatocel (hydroxypropyl methylcellulose 2% [HPMC]).

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, University of Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Pécs, Hungary.

METHODS

In this prospective study, the IOP in 118 eyes of 118 patients (57 men, 61 women, mean age 68 years +/- 7.8 [SD]) with no history of glaucoma was assessed by Goldmann applanation tonometry 2 to 3, 6 to 8, and 22 to 24 hours and 1 week after uneventful phacoemulsification and PC IOL implantation. The effect of the removal of Adatocel ("partial removal" from the anterior chamber [AC] only versus "complete removal" from behind of the IOL as well), the lens type (Medicontur 601 HP versus Bausch & Lomb Hydroview), and the type of anesthesia (topical versus parabulbar) were compared. Statistical analysis was performed using the Student t test, and P< or =.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The mean preoperative IOP was 13.83 +/- 2.5 mmHg. There were no significant differences at any time in postoperative IOP measurements between the 2 IOL types and the 2 modes of anesthesia. At 2 to 3 hours, 6 to 8 hours, and 22 to 24 hours, the IOP was significantly higher in the 30 eyes in which the Adatocel was partially removed (from the AC only) than in the 88 eyes in which it was completely removed (from behind the PC IOL as well) (P< or =.05, P< or =.01, and P< or =.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Severe postoperative IOP spikes in nonglaucomatous patients after uneventful phacoemulsification cataract surgery are rare. The type of implanted PC IOL and the mode of anesthesia had no significant effect on postoperative IOP. Total removal of the ophthalmic viscosurgical device, even when using HPMCs such as Adatocel, is necessary to prevent postoperative IOP spikes.

Free radical development in phacoemulsification cataract surgery

Phacoemulsification and aspiration (PEA) has become the most popular cataract surgery, due to the establishment of safe surgical techniques and development of associated instruments. However, corneal endothelial damage still represents a serious complication, as excessive damage can lead to irreversible bullous keratopathy. In addition to causes such as mechanical or heat injuries, free radical formation due to ultrasound has been posited as another cause of corneal endothelium damage in PEA. Ultrasound in aqueous solution induces cavitation, directly causing water molecule disintegration and resulting in the formation of hydroxylradicals, the most potent of the reactive oxygen species. Considering the oxidative insult to endothelial cells caused by free radicals, their presence in the anterior chamber may represent one of the most harmful factors during these procedures. Indeed, some researchers have recently started to evaluate PEA from the perspective of oxidative stress. Conversely, the major ingredient in ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs), which are indispensable for maintaining the anterior chamber in PEA surgery, is sodium hyaluronate, a known free radical scavenger. OVDs can thus be expected to provide some anti-free radical effect during PEA procedures. In addition, since commercially available OVDs display different properties regarding retention in the anterior chamber during PEA, the anti-free radical effect of OVDs is likely to depend on behavior during irrigation and aspiration. The present study followed standard PEA procedures in an eye model and measured hydroxylradicals in the anterior chamber using electron spin resonance. The kinetics of free radical intensity and effects of several OVDs during clinical PEA were also demonstrated. These studies may be of significance in re-evaluating OVDs as a chemical protectant for corneal endothelium, since the OVD has thus far only been regarded as a physical barrier. In addition, many reports about corneal endothelium damage during PEA have been published, but objective evaluation of various damaging factors has been difficult. The present assay of free radicals in a simulation of clinical PEA offers the first method to quantitatively assess stress on the corneal endothelium.

Empty-bag technique for acrylic intraocular lens implantation using Healon5

PURPOSE

To determine how often the empty-bag technique (EBT) for injecting an acrylic foldable intraocular lens (IOL) into the capsular bag using Healon5 (sodium hyaluronate 2.3%) will require a 2-compartment technique to remove the ophthalmic viscosurgical device (OVD) and compare this with that of a standard injection method using Healon5.

SETTING

Cincinnati Eye Institute and Ambulatory Surgical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.

METHODS

Forty-one eyes of 40 patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups. In Group A, standard capsular bag expansion was performed with Healon5 before implantation of an acrylic posterior chamber (PC) IOL. In Group B, Healon5 was placed in the anterior chamber followed by balanced salt solution expansion of the capsular bag before acrylic PC IOL implantation. In all patients, complete OVD removal was attempted with the automated aspiration tip anterior to the optic (rock 'n roll technique). The number of patients in each group who required placement of the aspiration tip posterior to the optic for complete removal was compared. Early postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) was also compared.

RESULTS

In Group A, 15 (75%) of 20 eyes required placement of the aspiration tip posterior to the optic for complete OVD removal and in Group B, 1 (0.05%) of 20 eyes. The postoperative IOP was similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The EBT decreased the likelihood that a 2-compartment OVD removal method would be necessary when using Healon5 for acrylic PC IOL implantation. The limitations of this new technique must be fully understood before it is used.

Removal times and techniques of a viscoadaptive ophthalmic viscosurgical device

PURPOSE

To analyze removal techniques for Healon5 (sodium hyaluronate 2.3%).

SETTING

Center for Research on Ocular Therapeutics and Biodevices, Charleston, South Carolina, USA, and Department of Ophthalmology, Ruprecht-Karls-University, Heidelberg, Germany.

METHODS

In a standardized laboratory setup, the Miyake-Apple posterior view video technique in human autopsy eyes was used to evaluate removal of an ophthalmic viscosurgical device (OVD) from capsular bags implanted with poly(methyl methacrylate), silicone, and acrylic intraocular lenses (IOLs). Healon5 was stained with fluorescein for better visualization. Open-sky preparation and an Alcon Legacy Series 20000 phaco machine with a flow rate of 25 mL/minute and a vacuum setting of +500 mm Hg (maximum irrigation/aspiration [I/A]) were used. With Technique 1, the I/A tip was placed on the center of the IOL and maximum aspiration was applied. With Technique 2 (modified rock 'n roll technique), the I/A tip was moved in quick circular movements on top of the IOL to break the OVD chains and facilitate aspiration.

RESULTS

With Technique 1, the mean removal time was 59.0 seconds +/- 23.1 (SD) and with Technique 2, 23.6 +/- 10.3 seconds (P =.004). The removal time of Healon5 correlated with the IOL material. With Technique 2, removal was fastest with silicone IOLs (13.5 +/- 2.1 seconds) followed by PMMA IOLs (17.5 +/- 2.1 seconds). With acrylic IOLs, remnants of the OVD trapped behind the IOL optic resulted in a longer removal time of 34.1 +/- 1.2 seconds.

CONCLUSIONS

Healon5 was completely removed from the capsular bag with the modified rock 'n roll technique. With acrylic IOLs, remnants can be trapped behind the optic and may be overlooked with an unstained OVD. Aspiration behind the optic is recommended with this IOL type.

Completion rate of continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis in pediatric cataract surgery using different viscoelastic materials

PURPOSE

To determine whether viscoelastic materials with a higher viscosity allow better control of the lens capsule, reducing the rate of incomplete continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis (CCC) during pediatric cataract surgery.

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco Medical Center, San Francisco, California, USA.

METHODS

This retrospective study comprised 25 eyes of 18 children who had cataract surgery by 1 surgeon. The type of viscoelastic agent used for the CCC portion of the surgery was obtained from surgical dictations and nursing charts and information on complications during the CCC, from surgical dictations. The patient's age, type of cataract, and intraocular lens placement were also obtained.

RESULTS

A CCC was successfully performed in 7 of 15 eyes (46.7%, mean age 7.6 years) using cohesive Healon (sodium hyaluronate 1%) or dispersive Viscoat (sodium hyaluronate 3%-chondroitin sulfate 4%) viscoelastic material and in 9 of 10 eyes (90%, mean age 6.4 years) using the high-viscosity viscoadaptive agent Healon 5 (sodium hyaluronate 2.3%) (chi square = 4.8900; P<.05). The unsuccessful CCCs in the Healon/Viscoat group were in 2 eyes with mature cataract, 1 eye with posterior polar cataract, 1 eye with posterior subcapsular cataract, and 4 eyes with lamellar cataract. The unsuccessful CCC in the Healon5 group was in 1 eye with mature cataract.

CONCLUSION

The superviscous properties of Healon5 under low turbulence conditions appear to lead to a higher CCC completion rate in children.

Clinical comparison of Healon5 and Healon in phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation

PURPOSE

To compare the overall clinical performance during phacoemulsification and intraocular lens (IOL) implantation, the effect on intraocular pressure (IOP), and the effect on corneal endothelium of Healon5 (sodium hyaluronate 2.3%) and Healon (sodium hyaluronate 1.0%) ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs).

SETTING

Multicenter study.

METHODS

In this randomized prospective clinical study, the performance of Healon5 (viscoadaptive; dispersive and cohesive) and Healon (cohesive) during cataract surgery was evaluated in 157 patients, 79 with Healon5 and 78 with Healon. Surgeons evaluated the following on a 5-point scale: retention during phacoemulsification (primary endpoint), ease of injection, anterior chamber maintenance during continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis (CCC), facilitation of IOL implantation, and ease of removal from the eye. Masked examiners other than the surgeon performed the following measurements: IOP preoperatively and 5 and 24 hours, 7 days, and 3 months postoperatively; corneal thickness before and 24 hours, 7 days, and 3 months postoperatively; and corneal endothelial cell count preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Intraocular retention during phacoemulsification was assessed as good or very good in 77% in the Healon5 group and 8% in the Healon group; the difference was statistically significant (P<.0001, Wilcoxon rank sum test). The Healon5 group had significantly better scores for anterior chamber maintenance during CCC (P<.0001) and facilitation of IOL implantation (P =.032), and the Healon group had significantly better scores for ease of injection (P<.0001) and ease of removal (P<.0001). There were no statistically significant between-group differences in IOP, corneal endothelial cell count, or corneal thickness.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons rated Healon5 better than Healon in retention during phacoemulsification, anterior chamber maintenance during CCC, and facilitation of IOL implantation. They assessed Healon as easier to inject and remove. There was no difference in safety-related parameters between the 2 OVDs. These findings indicate that Healon5 is effective in cataract surgery.

Survey of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cataract treatment is evolving, thanks to new phaco systems and innovative surgical techniques. Recent ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs) play an important role in the development of new approaches to surgery. Knowledge of the new techniques and advances in new OVDs is crucial to performing routine and complicated surgeries.

RECENT FINDINGS

Viscoadaptive substances have been introduced as a particular kind of OVD and are distinguished by high viscosity at a low flow rate and a tendency to fracture at higher flow rates, assuming pseudodispersive behavior. The ultimate soft shell technique emphasizes the rheology of viscoadaptive OVDs to perform phacoemulsification procedures, exploiting all the useful properties of these OVDs in terms of space maintenance and tissue protection. Recent studies have highlighted some new and interesting aspects of the use of OVDs. Current reports suggest that the association of lidocaine and OVD seems to be safe and useful in providing anesthesia during cataract surgery. Concern has been expressed in other studies regarding the presence of contaminants, such as endotoxins, which may be responsible for postoperative uveitis-like reactions. Finally, OVDs are widely known to protect the corneal endothelium during cataract surgery. Their role is also assuming relevance in vitreoretinal surgery.

SUMMARY

New OVDs and related techniques represent an advancement in cataract surgery.

Scheimpflug photography study of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices during simulated cataract surgery

PURPOSE

To evaluate by Scheimpflug photography the capacity of several commercially available ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs) to remain in the anterior chamber and maintain anterior chamber depth (ACD) during simulated cataract surgery in porcine cadaver eyes.

SETTING

Department of Preclinical Ophthalmology, Pharmacia & Upjohn AB, Uppsala, Sweden.

METHODS

Eighty eyes from newly slaughtered pigs were used. They were distributed equally among 8 OVDs: Amvisc Plus (sodium hyaluronate 1.6%), Biolon (sodium hyaluronate 1.0%), Biolon Prime (sodium hyaluronate 1.2%), Healon (sodium hyaluronate 1.0%), Healon GV (sodium hyaluronate 1.4%), Healon5 (sodium hyaluronate 2.3%), Provisc (sodium hyaluronate 1.0%), and Viscoat (sodium hyaluronate 3.0%-chondroitin sulfate 4.0%). Scheimpflug photographs were taken using a Nidek EAS-1000 instrument before surgery (control), after injection of the OVD, after continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis (CCC), and after lens extraction by phacoemulsification. Differences in the ACD with a P value less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. The retention capacity was visually assessed.

RESULTS

Healon5 had a significantly higher capacity to maintain the ACD than the other OVDs after CCC and phacoemulsification. After injection, Healon5, Viscoat, and Biolon Prime showed similar ACD-maintaining capacities.

CONCLUSIONS

The capacity of Healon5 to maintain the ACD during cataract surgery, ie, neutralizing the vitreous pressure and stabilizing the anterior segment of the eye, was significantly higher than that of the other OVDs.

Healon5 tamponade of corneal perforation during transplantation surgery

In "a chaud" keratoplasty in cases of corneal perforation, the main difficulty is the trephination of the recipient cornea in a soft eye. A temporary tamponade of the perforation can be provided by filling the anterior chamber with sodium hyaluronate 2.3% (Healon5). The cornea can then be grasped with vacuum and trephinated.