Outcomes Following Phacoemulsification With 1.8 & 2.2mm Incision: Randomized Clinical Trial

Overview

Cataract surgical techniques have significantly changed in recent years with the widespread adoption of smaller and smaller clear corneal incisions for phacoemulsification. Microincision surgery has many advantages, including reduced surgically induced astigmatism, faster visual recovery, and reduced intra and postoperative inflammation. Curently, microcoaxial phacoemulsification is being performed through 1.8 as well as 2.2 mm incisions. However, there is still a debate as to which is the best absolute incision size for microcoaxial cataract surgery. The aim of this study is to evaluate incision stability following microcoaxial phacoemulsification performed through 1.8 and 2.2 mm systems, as well as compare intraoperative performance and postoperative outcomes following microcoaxial phacoemulsification performed through these two incision sizes.

Cataract surgical techniques have significantly changed in recent years with the widespread adoption of smaller and smaller clear corneal incisions for phacoemulsification. Microincision surgery has many advantages, including reduced surgically induced astigmatism, faster visual recovery, and reduced intra and postoperative inflammation. In the recent times, microcoaxial phacoemulsification has gained popularity. The main advantage of this newer technique is that it uses the same methods as the conventional method but with smaller incisions. Curently, microcoaxial phacoemulsification is being performed through 1.8 as well as 2.2 mm incisions. However, there is still a debate as to which is the best absolute incision size for microcoaxial cataract surgery. The aim of this study is to evaluate incision stability following microcoaxial phacoemulsification performed through 1.8 and 2.2 mm systems, as well as compare intraoperative performance and postoperative outcomes following microcoaxial phacoemulsification performed through these two incision sizes.