ABSTRACT
Purpose:
To evaluate the effectiveness of a surgical device that intented to help in the preparation of the anterior capsulorhexis analyzing the design and shape, comparing with capsulorhexis made by free hand.
Methods:
Three ophthalmology residents(R3) at the HUOL and one surgeon in training, participate in this research as volunteers. Each surgeon perform 5 capsulorhexis in porcine eyes using the device, and five others by free hand as a control. All capsulorhexis were photographed having a ruler as reference to guide and calibrate a computer application for morphometric evaluation (Cambuí Labs, Natal, Brazil). All surgeons aimed to produce a circular continuous capsulorhexis of 5 mm diameter that represents 15,7mm in perimeter and 19,652mm2 in area. Each wet-lab capsulorhexis was evaluated in regard to these criteria: diameter (mean, maximum and minimum), perimeter, area, deviation from the ideal diameter and ideal shape.
Results:
Compare to control groups, capsulorhexis with the aid of the surgical device showed: 5,44mm ±0,89 vs 6,37mm ±0,67, for capsulorhexis diameter (p=0,001); 17,52mm ±1,92 vs 20,14mm ±2,09 for capsulorhexis perimeter (<0.001); 24,73mm2 ±1,92 vs 32,62mm2 ±6,36 for capsulorhexis area (p<0,001). A tendency for better result with the aid of the surgical device was observed for deviation of an ideal diameter or ideal aspect were appreciated: 0,87mm ±0,05 vs 0,9 ±0,04 for deviation of a curve (p=0,06); 1,26mm ±0,12 vs 1,21mm ±0,7 for the capsulorhexis aspect (p=0,09).
Conclusion:
Capsulorhexis produced with the aid of the surgical device, significantly improved wet-lab capsulorhexis performance.
Keywords:
Capsulorhexis/instrumentation; Cataract extraction/instrumentation; Lasers
