Comparative Clinical Study of Surgical Performance of Quatera 700 Versus Centurion and Signature Pro Phacoemulsification Systems

Overview

Journal Clin Ophthalmol

Publisher Dove Medical Press

Specialty Ophthalmology

Date 2024 Sep 30

PMID 39346969

Authors

Sri Ganesh

Sheetal Brar

Supriya Sriganesh

Hemali D Bhavsar

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the intra-operative surgical performance of Quatera 700 with Centurion and Signature Pro phacoemulsification systems.

Setting: Nethradhama Superspeciality Eye Hospital, Bangalore, India.

Study Design: Prospective, interventional, 3-arm, randomized comparison study.

Methods: A total of 180 non-consecutive eyes satisfying the eligibility criteria were recruited. N = 60 eyes were operated using each of the above systems, of which n = 30 eyes had LOCS III grade 1-2, and n = 30 eyes had grade 3-4 nuclear density. Phacoemulsification with foldable IOL implantation was performed by a single experienced surgeon. Chamber stability scores (1-4, 4 being the worst), fluid turnover per case, surge incidence and intra-operative complications were assessed.

Results: Intra-operatively, the mean chamber stability score was significantly better for the Quatera 700 in both the soft and dense cataract groups compared to the other two machines (p < 0.001). Total Phaco Time (TPT) with Quatera 700 was significantly lower compared to Signature Pro, while it was comparable with Centurion for both the soft and dense cataract groups. The mean fluid turnover was significantly lower for the Quatera 700 in the dense cataract group (p = 0.04) and so was the combined phaco and I/A time (p = 0.01) when compared with Signature Pro. One eye operated with Signature Pro and 2 eyes operated with Centurion had PCR due to surge. The mean corneal clarity scores on POD-1 and specular counts at 2 weeks and 6 months were comparable.

Conclusion: The new Quatera 700 system resulted in lesser TPT, fluid turnover and phaco + I/A time than Signature Pro, while its performance was comparable to Centurion for these parameters. Moreover, the surgeon graded intra-operative chamber stability scoring was highest, when compared to the other two systems.

Ctri Registration Number: CTRI/2022/01/039296.

References

Jabs D, Nussenblatt R, Rosenbaum J . Standardization of uveitis nomenclature for reporting clinical data. Results of the First International Workshop. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005; 140(3):509-16. PMC: 8935739. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2005.03.057. View

Alio J, Soria F, Abdou A, Pena-Garcia P, Fernandez-Buenaga R, Javaloy J . Comparative outcomes of bimanual MICS and 2.2-mm coaxial phacoemulsification assisted by femtosecond technology. J Refract Surg. 2014; 30(1):34-40. DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20131217-04. View

Dasgupta S, Mehra R . Comparative studies between longitudinal and torsional modes in phacoemulsification, using active fluidics technology along with the intrepid balanced tip. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2018; 66(10):1417-1422. PMC: 6173017. DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_7_18. View

Sharif-Kashani P, Fanney D, Injev V . Comparison of occlusion break responses and vacuum rise times of phacoemulsification systems. BMC Ophthalmol. 2014; 14:96. PMC: 4134114. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2415-14-96. View

Chylack Jr L, Wolfe J, Singer D, Leske M, Bullimore M, Bailey I . The Lens Opacities Classification System III. The Longitudinal Study of Cataract Study Group. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993; 111(6):831-6. DOI: 10.1001/archopht.1993.01090060119035. View

Fanney D, Layser G, R K A, Kohlhammer S, Kubler C, Seibel B . Experimental study comparing 2 different phacoemulsification systems with intraocular pressure control during steady-state flow and occlusion break surge events. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2023; 49(9):976-981. DOI: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001242. View

Dewan T, Malik P, Tomar P . Comparison of effective phacoemulsification time and corneal endothelial cell loss using three different ultrasound frequencies: A randomized controlled trial. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2022; 70(4):1180-1185. PMC: 9240574. DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_2163_21. View

Jiraskova N, Stepanov A . OUR EXPERIENCE WITH ACTIVE SENTRY AND CENTURION OZIL HANDPIECES. Cesk Slov Oftalmol. 2021; 77(1):18-21. DOI: 10.31348/2021/1. View

Reuschel A, Bogatsch H, Barth T, Wiedemann R . Comparison of endothelial changes and power settings between torsional and longitudinal phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010; 36(11):1855-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.06.060. View

10.

Tognetto D, DAloisio R, Cecchini P, Di Nicola M, Di Martino G . Comparative clinical study of Whitestar Signature phacoemulsification system with standard and Ellips FX handpieces. Int Ophthalmol. 2017; 38(4):1697-1702. DOI: 10.1007/s10792-017-0649-5. View

11.

Aravena C, Dyk D, Thorne A, Fanney D, Miller K . Aqueous volume loss associated with occlusion break surge in phacoemulsifiers from 4 different manufacturers. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2018; 44(7):884-888. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2018.02.026. View

12.

Ganesh S, Brar S, Rp N, Rathod D . Clinical Outcomes, Contrast Sensitivity, Reading Performance and Patient Satisfaction Following Bilateral Implantation of AT LARA 829MP EDoF IOLs. Clin Ophthalmol. 2021; 15:4247-4257. PMC: 8544275. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S331860. View

13.

Demircan S, Atas M, Goktas E, Baskan B . Comparison of 45-degree Kelman and 45-degree balanced phaco tip designs in torsional microcoaxial phacoemulsification. Int J Ophthalmol. 2015; 8(6):1168-72. PMC: 4651883. DOI: 10.3980/j.issn.2222-3959.2015.06.16. View

14.

Sun Y, Cao R, Liu Z, Xia H, Cen Y, Gao L . Comparisons of the energy efficiency and intraocular safety of two torsional phacoemulsification tips. BMC Ophthalmol. 2022; 22(1):392. PMC: 9528131. DOI: 10.1186/s12886-022-02619-0. View

15.

Patricio M, Almeida A, Rodrigues M, Guedes M, Ferreira T . Correlation between cataract grading by Scheimpflug imaging and phaco time in phacoemulsification using peristaltic and venturi pumps. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2013; 23(6):789-92. DOI: 10.5301/ejo.5000293. View

16.

Kim D, Wee W, Lee J, Kim M . The comparison between torsional and conventional mode phacoemulsification in moderate and hard cataracts. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2010; 24(6):336-40. PMC: 2992560. DOI: 10.3341/kjo.2010.24.6.336. View

17.

Pacifico R . Ultrasonic energy in phacoemulsification: mechanical cutting and cavitation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1994; 20(3):338-41. DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(13)80587-1. View

18.

McNeill J . Flared phacoemulsification tips to decrease ultrasound time and energy in cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001; 27(9):1433-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(01)00789-1. View

19.

Tognetto D, Cecchini P, Leon P, Di Nicola M, Ravalico G . Stroke dynamics and frequency of 3 phacoemulsification machines. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012; 38(2):333-42. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.07.041. View

20.

Sabur H, Aydin Eroglu S, Azarsiz S . Efficacy of Balanced Torsional Phacoemulsification Tip for Cataract Surgery. J Curr Ophthalmol. 2022; 34(1):74-79. PMC: 9128437. DOI: 10.4103/joco.joco_105_21. View