Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Henriksen, Bradley S., BS
• Gardiner, Gareth, BS
• Garff, Kevin, BS
• Gupta, Isha, BS
• Stagg, Brian C., MD
• Zaugg, Brian, MD
• Pettey, Jeff H., MD
• Barlow, William R., MD
• Olson, Randall J., MD

Titel

Thermal evaluation of two phacoemulsification systems

Ist Teil von

• Canadian journal of ophthalmology, 2016-02, Vol.51 (1), p.14-18

Ort / Verlag

England: Elsevier Inc

Erscheinungsjahr

2016

Quelle

MEDLINE

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Abstract Objective To compare thermal profiles of new transversal ultrasound power modulation to torsional ultrasound in an artificial chamber and cadaver eye. Design Laboratory investigation. Methods John A. Moran Eye Center Laboratories, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, was the study setting. Temperature increase after 30 seconds was measured at the needle midshaft in an artificial chamber and at maximal friction point in a cadaver eye. Ellips FX (transverse) was tested at 100% power, as was Signature with micropulse settings (6 milliseconds on and off). OZil (torsional only) was tested at 100% power in the artificial chamber and cadaver eye. Runs were completed with aspiration blocked. Temperature was continuously measured on the phacoemulsification sleeve using a microthermistor probe connected to the BAT-10 multipurpose thermometer, with an accuracy of ±0.1°C. Results Transversal FX had a greater temperature increase than micropulse ( p < 0.001) and torsional ( p < 0.001). Micropulse had a greater temperature increase than torsional ( p < 0.001). The cadaver eye had a greater temperature increase than the artificial chamber for torsional ( p < 0.001). Conclusions Higher heat accumulation and potential for incisional burn occurred with the cadaver model than with the artificial chamber, suggesting the need for caution when using 100% torsional ultrasound with aspiration blocked. Transversal FX generated more heat than was reported originally. Further study is needed to determine the incidence of incisional burn with varied power settings for this new model. Micropulse generated more heat than previous reports, but the increased efficiency is likely to negate potentially increased incisional burn risk.