Clinical trial evaluating Viscoat and Visthesia ophthalmic viscosurgical devices in corneal endothelial loss after cataract extraction and intraocular lens implantation

Corneal endothelial cell loss and intraocular pressure following phacoemulsification using a new viscous-cohesive ophthalmic viscosurgical device

PURPOSE

To compare results of two ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs)-Viscoat (a dispersive OVD, Alcon) and FR-Pro (a viscous-cohesive OVD, Rayner), in phacoemulsification surgery.

METHODS

A prospective randomized controlled study. Patients undergoing phacoemulsification were randomly assigned to receive one of the two OVDs. Exclusion criteria were age under 40, preoperative endothelial cell count (ECC) below 1,500 cells/mm2 and an eventful surgery. The primary outcome was change in ECC from baseline to postoperative month one and month three. Secondary outcomes were the difference between ECC at postoperative month one and month three, changes in IOP and occurrence of an IOP spike ≥ 30 mmHg after surgery.

RESULTS

The study included 84 eyes-43 in the Viscoat group and 41 in the FR-Pro group. Mean cell density loss at month one and month three was 17.0 and 19.2%, respectively, for the Viscoat group and 18.4 and 18.8%, respectively, for the FR-Pro group, with no statistically significant difference between the groups (p = 0.772 and p = 0.671, respectively). The mean ECC difference between the month one and month three visits was 50.5 cells/mm2 and was not statistically significant (p = 0.285). One eye in each group had an IOP spike ≥ 30 mmHg, both normalized by postoperative week one.

CONCLUSIONS

Viscoat and FR-Pro have comparable results following phacoemulsification surgery, suggesting that while FR-Pro is not a dispersive OVD, its endothelial cell protection may be comparable to one, perhaps due to the addition of sorbitol. Furthermore, a one-month follow-up of ECC seems sufficient in such trials.

Topical anaesthesia plus intracameral lidocaine versus topical anaesthesia alone for phacoemulsification cataract surgery in adults

BACKGROUND

Phacoemulsification cataract surgery is usually performed in adults under local anaesthesia. Topical anaesthesia, which involves instilling anaesthetic drops to the ocular surface prior to and during surgery, has found large acceptance internationally. It is safe and allows for rapid patient turnover and visual recovery. Some surgeons have supplemented topical anaesthesia with intracameral lidocaine, reasoning that this may further reduce intraoperative pain, particularly during surgical stages involving manipulation of intraocular structures and rapid changes in fluid dynamics. This review, originally published in 2006 and updated in 2020, explores the efficacy and safety of using supplementary intracameral lidocaine in phacoemulsification cataract surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether supplementing topical anaesthesia with intracameral lidocaine for phacoemulsification cataract surgery in adults reduces intraoperative and postoperative pain, and to assess differences in participant satisfaction, need for additional intraoperative anaesthesia, surgeon satisfaction, measures of intraocular toxicity, and adverse effects attributable to choice of anaesthesia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS BIREME iAH, and six trial registries on 4 February 2020. We also searched the reference lists of identified studies. There were no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) where participants underwent phacoemulsification for age-related cataract under topical anaesthesia with or without intracameral lidocaine either in two eyes of the same participant, or in different participants. We also included studies that used oral or intravenous sedation in addition to local anaesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial methodological quality using standard Cochrane procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five new RCTs in this updated review. We included a total of 13 trials in the review, conducted in the UK, the USA, Australia, Italy, Canada, Taiwan, Singapore, India, and Pakistan, and comprising 2388 eyes of 2355 participants (one study was a paired-eye study with each participant acting as their own control). The age range of participants was 34 to 95 years. We excluded studies that only included low-risk participants and excluded more difficult operative cases, for example hard lens nuclei or small pupils. We excluded studies assessing only participants with Fuchs' endothelial dystrophy. We judged one study as at high risk for selection bias. We assessed five studies as having an unclear risk of bias for random sequence generation and seven studies an unclear risk of bias for allocation concealment. We judged three studies as at high risk of performance bias, as the surgeon was not blinded, and two studies as at unclear risk of bias for this domain. No studies were judged as at high risk for detection bias, but five studies were judged to have an unclear risk of bias for this domain. We judged all 13 included studies to have a low risk of attrition bias and an unclear risk of reporting bias. Data from eight RCTs favoured topical anaesthesia plus intracameral lidocaine 0.5% to 1% over topical anaesthesia alone for reducing intraoperative pain when measured using a 10-point visual analogue scale, analysed as a continuous outcome. Mean pain score was 0.26 lower in the supplemental intracameral lidocaine group (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.39 to -0.13, 1692 eyes, moderate-quality evidence). Data from seven RCTs favoured supplemental intracameral lidocaine for reducing intraoperative pain when measured as a dichotomous outcome. The odds ratio of experiencing any pain was 0.40 versus the topical anaesthesia-only group (95% CI 0.29 to 0.57, 1268 eyes, moderate-quality evidence). Data from four RCTs did not show any additional benefit on postoperative pain when measured using a 10-point visual analogue scale (mean difference 0.12 points, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.05, 751 eyes, moderate-quality evidence). The impact on participant satisfaction was uncertain as only one small study investigated this outcome. The study suggested no difference between groups (mean difference 0.1 points, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.27, 60 eyes, low-quality evidence). Data from seven RCTs did not demonstrate a difference between groups in the need for additional intraoperative anaesthesia (odds ratio 0.88, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.39, 1194 eyes of 1161 participants; low-quality evidence), although this result is uncertain. A variety of measures were reported relating to possible intraocular toxicity. Data from four RCTs did not demonstrate a difference between groups in mean percentage corneal endothelial cell count change from pre- to postoperatively (mean difference 0.89%, 95% CI -1.12% to 2.9%, 254 eyes of 221 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Synthesis of the evidence from eight RCTs identified no difference in intraoperative adverse events between groups (odds ratio 1.00, 95% CI 0.32 to 3.16, 1726 eyes, low-quality evidence). This result should be interpreted with caution, mainly due to a lack of clear definitions of adverse events, low numbers of events, heterogeneity between studies, and large confidence intervals. Large observational studies may have been more appropriate for looking at this outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-quality evidence that supplementation of topical anaesthesia with intracameral lidocaine 0.5% to 1% for phacoemulsification cataract surgery in adults reduces participant perception of intraoperative pain. The odds of experiencing any pain (as opposed to no pain) were 60% less for the topical anaesthesia plus intracameral lidocaine group versus the topical anaesthesia-only group. However, the numerical amplitude of the effect may not be of great clinical significance on the continuous pain score scale. Generally, the pain scores were consistently low for both techniques. We found moderate-quality evidence that there is no additional benefit of intracameral lidocaine on postoperative pain. There is insufficient evidence to determine the impact on participant satisfaction and need for additional intraoperative anaesthesia due to low-quality evidence. There is moderate-quality evidence that intracameral lidocaine supplementation does not increase measures of intraocular toxicity, specifically loss of corneal endothelial cells. There is low-quality evidence that the incidence of intraoperative adverse events is unchanged with intracameral lidocaine supplementation, but as RCTs are not the optimum medium for looking at this, this result should be interpreted with caution. Further research specifically investigating the adverse effects of intracameral anaesthesia might help to better determine its safety profile. Economic evaluations would also be useful for detailing cost implications.

The Impact of Reused Phaco Tip on Outcomes of Phacoemulsification Surgery

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of reused phaco tip on intraoperative performance and postoperative outcomes after 2.2 mm micro-coaxial torsional and transversal phacoemulsification.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This prospective randomized study enrolled 136 eyes of 136 cataract patients; 68 eyes in torsional group (34 eyes with single use tip, 34 eyes with reused tip) and 68 eyes in transversal group (34 eyes with single use tip, 34 eyes with reused tip). Intraoperative measurements were total ultrasound (U/S) time, torsional U/S time, cumulative dissipated energy (CDE), estimated fluid use (EFU) in the torsional group and total phacoemulsification time (TPT), and effective phacoemulsification time (EPT) in transversal phacoemulsification. The central endothelial cell density (ECD) and the central corneal thickness (CCT) were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively at 1 and 30 days using noncontact specular microscopy.

RESULTS

Intraoperative measurements in torsional phacoemulsification showed significant increase in total U/S time (p = 0.01), torsional U/S time (p = 0.01), and CDE (p = 0.01) with the reused tip. The EFU was similar in both tip groups (p = 0.36). The total U/S time, torsional U/S time, and CDE in torsional group were significantly increased with the reused tip for grade III (p = 0.03 for all parameters) and grade IV cataracts (p = 0.005 for torsional U/S time and CDE; p = 0.006 for total U/S time). Intraoperative measurements in transversal phacoemulsification showed no differences in TPT and EPT between tip groups (p > 0.05). The change in ECD and CCT in torsional and transversal phacoemulsification groups were similar in both tip groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that sharpness of phaco tip edge increases the efficiency of torsional phacoemulsification for hard cataracts. This result does not mean that reused phaco tip may be used in soft and medium cataracts. As the timing of tip's change is a user-dependent procedure, a new single phaco tip should be used in each case if possible.

Anterior Synechiolysis with Healon Needle and Ophthalmic Viscosurgical Devices after Anterior Lamellar Dissection in Penetrating Keratoplasty

PURPOSE

We described a technique to perform anterior synechiolysis with a healon needle and Viscoat® ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs) through anterior lamellar dissection in penetrating keratoplasty.

METHODS

OVDs were gently injected between iridocorneal adhesions with a healon needle to make a blunt dissection after anterior lamellar corneal dissection. Anterior synechiolysis at 360 degrees was completed with a healon needle and OVDs. Subsequently, the deep corneal lamella was cut with right and left Troutman-Katzin corneal scissors. 24 interrupted sutures were made with 10-0 nylon suture to implant the donor cornea.

RESULTS

In two eyes from two patients, with corneal opacity and nearly total anterior synechiae, clear grafts and relatively deep anterior chambers were achieved. Penetrating keratoplasty with anterior synechiolysis was thus successful with a healon needle and OVDs through lamellar dissection.

CONCLUSIONS

Anterior synechiolysis with a healon needle and OVDs through lamellar dissection is a safe and efficient technique for keratoplasty in patients with corneal opacity with anterior synechiae.

Advances in cataract surgery: preserving the corneal endothelium

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cataract surgery is known to lead to some degree of corneal endothelial cell loss (ECL). The purpose of this review is to describe how recent technological advancements such as femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) affect corneal endothelium during cataract surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

It has been suggested that FLACS may reduce the amount of required ultrasound energy used in cataract surgery, a factor known to be directly related to ECL. Several recent studies demonstrate either no difference or less ECL with FLACS than with standard phacoemulsification 1-3 months after surgery. However, results at 6 months show comparable ECL between the two techniques. Other recent advancements in surgical technique, such as biaxial microincision surgery, result in similar ECL rates to that of standard phacoemulsification. The use of ultraviolet light in the newly developing light-adjustable intraocular lenses does not increase ECL. Studies show either similar results or less ECL with the use of the newer viscous-dispersives when compared with other viscoelastic devices. Other aspects such as the use of intracameral injections have no adverse effects on corneal endothelium.

SUMMARY

Newly emerging cataract surgical techniques cause comparable ECL to that of conventional phacoemulsification. Femtosecond laser-assistance may reduce ECL, but likely only in the early postoperative period. Further studies are needed to better elucidate short and long-term effects of FLACS on the corneal endothelium. Viscous dispersives may offer equal or increased protection of the corneal endothelium during surgery compared with viscoelastic devices currently in wide use, but further studies are required to support these results.