| Title |
Evaluating the different laser fragmentation patterns used in laser cataract surgeries in terms of effective phacoemulsification time and power
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s64611 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tukezban Huseynova, Mariko Mita, Christine Carole C Corpuz, Yuko Sotoyama, Minoru Tomita |
| Abstract |
To evaluate the effects of the different fragmentation patterns for the lens nucleus in terms of the effective phacoemulsification time (EPT) and power. Shinagawa LASIK Center, Tokyo, Japan. Comparison study. Seventy-one eyes of 71 patients had preoperative lens opacity grading based on the Emery-Little Classification (Grade 1 and Grade 2). Eyes underwent femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (Catalys™ Precision Laser System), for capsulotomy and lens fragmentation. For the lens fragmentation, either the quadrants softened (Quadrant) or the quadrants complete (Complete) pattern was used. The mean EPT and phacoemulsification (phaco) power for each cutting pattern of Grades 1 and 2 cataracts were evaluated. The mean EPT was 28.96 seconds in the Quadrant Group and 16.31 seconds in the Complete Group (P=0.006). The mean phaco power was 8.07% in the Quadrant Group and 4.77% in the Complete Group (P=0.0002). Comparing the Quadrant and Complete Groups of Grade 1 cataract showed no significant difference in EPT (P=0.16), but showed a significant difference in phaco power (P=0.033). Comparing the Quadrant and Complete patterns of Grade 2 cataract showed significant differences in both EPT (P=0.012) and phaco power (P=0.003). Using the Complete pattern showed a 44.7% reduction in EPT and a 40.9% reduction in phaco power when compared to the Quadrant Group. Using the smaller fragmentation pattern in femtosecond laser cataract surgery, the phaco time and power were reduced significantly when compared to the procedure with the larger fragmentation pattern. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 22 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Researcher | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 57% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 6 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 November 2015.
All research outputs
#22,759,452
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#3,207
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,307
of 294,811 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#73
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,811 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.