Advertisement

Impact of lens density and lens thickness on cumulative dissipated energy in femtosecond laser–assisted cataract surgery

  • Mehdi Shajari
  • Vladimir Rusev
  • Wolfgang Mayer
  • Vasilios Diakonis
  • Kerstin Petermann
  • Thomas KohnenEmail author
Original Article
  • 19 Downloads

Abstract

To evaluate the required cumulative dissipated energy (CDE) to fragment the crystalline lens in femtosecond laser–assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) in relation to lens density and lens thickness. Consecutive eyes that underwent FLACS between September 2014 and March 2017 by a single surgeon using in all cases the same femtosecond laser and phacoemulsification platform were included in our retrospective study. Prior to surgery, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), optical biometry corneal, and crystalline lens tomographies were performed to assess anterior chamber depth (ACD), axial length (AL), and crystalline lens parameters (i.e., lens density, thickness, and nucleus staging (NS)). After surgery, CDE was calculated and analyzed in relation to lens density (LD) and lens thickness (LT). Zero ultrasound expenditure cases were recorded and their occurrence analyzed. The chart review identified 236 eyes of 200 patients, 98 males and 102 females aged 65± 15 years which were included in the study. Mean LD was 11.26 ± 2.05 pixel intensity units (range 7.30–18.80), and the mean LT was 3417 ± 405.17 μm (range 2545–4701). LD and LT correlated moderately (r = 0.50, p < 0.001) and weakly (r = 0.23, p < 0.001), with post-laser CDE. Higher LD and LT were also associated with lower rates of zero phaco (eyes in which no phacoemulsification energy was necessary). Furthermore, NS (r = 0.528, p < 0.001) and CDVA (r = − 0.3524, p < 0.001) also correlated with CDE. Higher LD, LT, NS values, and low CDVA are associated with higher ultrasound expenditure (CDE—cumulative dissipated energy) and with lower rates of zero ultrasound expenditure during FLACS.

Keywords

Pentacam Intraocular lens Lens density Lens thickness Zero phaco CDE Cumulative dissipated energy FLACS Femtosecond laser Cataract surgery 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Alison Rowan McEwan and Leon de’Lorenzo, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany, provided additional support in the proof reading and preparation of this manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical approval

The study was designed in compliance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the local ethics committee. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Conflict of interest

Mehdi Shajari: Oculus, Zeiss, Staar, Santen, Oertli. Vladimir Rusev: none. Wolfgang Mayer: Consultant or Advisory Board—Alcon, Allergan, Polytech/Domilens, Zeiss Meditec, Ziemer. Vasilios Diakonis: none. Kerstin Petermann: none. Thomas Kohnen: Research Funding—Hoya, J&J Vision (Abbott), Novartis (Alcon), Oculentis, Oculus, Schwind, Zeiss. Consultant or Advisory Board—Geuder, J&J Vision (Abbott), Novartis (Alcon), Oculus, Santen, Schwind, STAAR, TearLab, Thea Pharma, Thieme Compliance, Ziemer, Zeiss. Consultant and Research for Abbott/J&J, Alcon/Novartis, Schwind, Zeiss. Consultant for Allergan, Bausch & Lomb, Dompe, Geuder, Med Update, Oculentis, Oculus, Rayner, Santen, Staar, Thea, Tear Lab, Thieme, Unimed Verlag, Ziemer. Research for Avedro, Hoya, Presbia.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Labiris G, Ntonti P, Ntitsos K, Katsanos A, Sideroudi H, Kozobolis V (2017) Comparison of the biometric measurements calculated with Zeiss IOL-master and WaveLight OB-820. Clin Ophthalmol 11:753–758.  https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S133207 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mayer WJ, Klaproth OK, Hengerer FH, Kohnen T (2014) Impact of crystalline lens opacification on effective phacoemulsification time in femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery. Am J Ophthalmol 157:426–432.e1.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2013.09.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Magalhães FP, Costa EF, Cariello AJ, Rodrigues EB, Hofling-Lima AL (2011) Comparative analysis of the nuclear lens opalescence by the Lens Opacities Classification System III with nuclear density values provided by Oculus Pentacam: a cross-section study using Pentacam Nucleus Staging software. Arq Bras Oftalmol 74:110–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Al-Khateeb G, Shajari M, Vunnava K, Petermann K, Kohnen T (2017) Impact of lens densitometry on phacoemulsification parameters and usage of ultrasound energy in femtosecond laser-assisted lens surgery. Can J Ophthalmol 52:331–337.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjo.2017.01.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reddy KP, Kandulla J, Auffarth GU (2013) Effectiveness and safety of femtosecond laser–assisted lens fragmentation and anterior capsulotomy versus the manual technique in cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 39:1297–1306.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.05.035 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Krarup T, Morten Holm L, la Cour M, Kjaerbo H (2014) Endothelial cell loss and refractive predictability in femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery compared with conventional cataract surgery. Acta Ophthalmol 92:617–622.  https://doi.org/10.1111/aos CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Daya SM, Nanavaty MA, Espinosa-Lagana MM (2014) Translenticular hydrodissection, lens fragmentation, and influence on ultrasound power in femtosecond laser–assisted cataract surgery and refractive lens exchange. J Cataract Refract Surg 40:37–43.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.07.040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Abell RG, Kerr NM, Vote BJ (2013) Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery compared with conventional cataract surgery. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 41:455–462.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ceo.12025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Abell RG, Kerr NM, Vote BJ (2013) Toward zero effective phacoemulsification time using femtosecond laser pretreatment. Ophthalmology 120:942–948.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2012.11.045 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Abell RG, Kerr NM, Howie AR, Mustaffa Kamal MAA, Allen PL, Vote BJ (2014) Effect of femtosecond laser–assisted cataract surgery on the corneal endothelium. J Cataract Refract Surg 40:1777–1783.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.05.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kránitz K, Takacs A, Miháltz K, Kovács I, Knorz MC, Nagy ZZ (2011) Femtosecond laser capsulotomy and manual continuous curvilinear capsulorrhexis parameters and their effects on intraocular lens centration. J Refract Surg 27:558–563.  https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20110623-03 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ecsedy M, Miháltz K, Kovács I, Takács Á, Filkorn T, Nagy ZZ (2011) Effect of femtosecond laser cataract surgery on the macula. J Refract Surg 27:717–722.  https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20110825-01 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gupta M, Ram J, Jain A, Sukhija J, Chaudhary M (2013) Correlation of nuclear density using the Lens Opacity Classification System III versus Scheimpflug imaging with phacoemulsification parameters. J Cataract Refract Surg 39:1818–1823.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.05.052 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Faria-Correia F, Lopes B, Monteiro T, Franqueira N, Ambrósio R (2017) Correlation between different Scheimpflug-based lens densitometry analysis and effective phacoemulsification time in mild nuclear cataracts. Int Ophthalmol.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-017-0566-7

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of OphthalmologyGoethe-UniversityFrankfurt am MainGermany
  2. 2.Department of OphthalmologyLudwig Maximillian UniversityMunichGermany
  3. 3.Bascom Palmer Eye InstituteMiamiUSA

Personalised recommendations