scholarly journals Visual outcome and major surgical complications of extracapsular cataract extraction versus manual small-incision cataract surgery performed by resident doctors at tertiary care institute as part of learning curve

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 65
Author(s):  
Shekhar Akarkar ◽  
UgamP. S Usgaonkar
Keyword(s):  
Learning Curve ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Surgical Complications ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Visual Outcome ◽  
Cataract Extraction ◽  
Extracapsular Cataract Extraction ◽  
Small Incision Cataract Surgery ◽  
Small Incision ◽  
Care Institute

scholarly journals Comparative Study of Extra Capsular Cataract Extraction (ECCE) and Small Incision Cataract Surgery (SICS): Experience on Cataract Surgery in a Tertiary Center of Army Hospital, Kathmandu

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-167
Author(s):  
Sagar Rajkarnikar ◽  
Dhan Bahadur Shrestha ◽  
Sachit Dhakal ◽  
Ram Shrestha ◽  
Kamala Thapa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Visual Outcome ◽  
Cataract Extraction ◽  
Extracapsular Cataract Extraction ◽  
Small Incision Cataract Surgery ◽  
Record Keeping ◽  
Mature Cataract ◽  
Small Incision ◽  
Army Hospital ◽  
Tertiary Center

Introduction: Cataract is a common ailment of the old age hindering daily activities leading to poor quality of life due to poor vision. It is the commonest cause of treatable blindness. In practice, extracapsular cataract excision and small incision cataract surgery are the two-common surgery for cataract these days in developing part like in Nepal. Between these two cataract surgeries, ECCE and SICS; SICS gives the better visual outcome. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was carried out including 286 eyes which were operated either by conventional extracapsular cataract extraction or small-incision cataract surgery. The patient’s demographics, preoperative vision, postoperative parameters/variables were studied from the patient’s record keeping. The postoperative visual outcome and complications were compared in both groups at the immediate post-operative period and at 8 weeks follow up period. Result: Among the total 286 cases, 138 underwent ECCE and 148 underwent SICS. 145 (50.6%) were right eye, 141 (49.3%) were left eye. Among total operated cases, 123 (43%) were mature cataract, 97 (33.9%) immature cataract, 66 (23.1%) hyper-mature cataract. In 172 cases (60.1%) there was a good vision, in 104 cases (36.4%) it was borderline while in rest 10 (3.5%) cases it was poor on the 60th postoperative day. There was the better visual outcome (≥6/18) with SICS (78.3%) than ECCE (40.5%) (p<0.001) on the 60th post-operative day. Among cases undergoing SICS the complications were less than ECCE. (p<0.001, OR=5.72 (2.10-15.51)). Conclusion: This study supports that SICS is safer than ECCE with less complication rate and better visual outcome in short term observation.  

scholarly journals Visual outcome of conventional extracapsular cataract extraction with posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation versus manual small-incision cataract surgery

1970 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Gurung ◽  
DB Karki ◽  
S Shrestha ◽  
AP Rijal
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Postoperative Period ◽  
Cataract Extraction ◽  
Posterior Chamber ◽  
P Value ◽  
Extracapsular Cataract Extraction ◽  
Small Incision Cataract Surgery ◽  
Small Incision ◽  
Posterior Chamber Intraocular Lens

Background: An effective method for cataract surgery should be identified to combat cataract blindness. Aim: To study the surgical outcome of conventional extracapsular cataract extraction versus manual small-incision cataract surgery. Materials and methods: A randomized clinical trial was carried out including one hundred eyes (88 patients) which were divided into two groups using systematic randomization: groups of conventional extracapsular cataract extraction with posterior chamber intraocular lens (ECCE with PCIOL) implantation and manual small-incision cataract surgery (MSICS). The postoperative parameters/variables studied were the unaided and best-corrected visual acuity and astigmatism. Statistics: Epi info 2000 version statistical software was used for data analysis and calculation of relative risk, 95% CI and p value. The p value of less than 0.05 was considered as significant. Results: In the immediate postoperative period, unaided visual acuity of =/> 6/18 was achieved in 24 subjects in MSICS group versus 7 in ECCE with PCIOL group (RR=2.05, 95% CI=1.44 - 2.94, p = 0.0002), whereas the same at 6 - 8 weeks postoperatively was found in 28 and 22 subjects in those groups respectively (RR=1.27, 95% CI=0.86-1.89, p=0.23). The astigmatism of =/> 2 at 6 - 8 weeks was found in 35 and 17 subjects from the conventional and MSICS groups respectively ( R=2.28, 95% CI = 1.39-3.73, p=0.0002). Conclusion: Both MSICS and conventional ECCE with PCIOL are safe and effective techniques for treatment of cataract patients. A more rapid recovery of good vision can be achieved with MSICS than with conventional ECCE with PCIOL in the immediate postoperative period. Key words: ECCE; MSICS; visual acuity; astigmatism DOI: 10.3126/nepjoph.v1i1.3668 Nep J Oph 2009;1(1):13-19

scholarly journals Hospital-based community cataract surgery: comparison of visual outcomes between conventional extra-capsular cataract extraction and small incision cataract surgery

1970 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
P Karki ◽  
JK Shrestha ◽  
JB Shrestha
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Visual Outcome ◽  
Cataract Extraction ◽  
P Value ◽  
Small Incision Cataract Surgery ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Visual Outcomes ◽  
Small Incision ◽  
Statistical Program

Introduction: The small-incision cataract surgery is gaining popularity among the ophthalmic surgeons. Objective: To compare the visual outcome of conventional extra-capsular cataract extraction (ECCE) and small-incision cataract surgery (SICS) in a hospital based community cataract program. Materials and methods: A prospective interventional study without randomization was carried out including the patients undergoing cataract surgery by either conventional ECCE or manual SICS. They were followed up for 6 weeks postoperatively. The visual outcomes were compared between the two groups. Statistics: The statistical program Epi-Info version 2000 was used to analyze the data. Mean values with standard deviations, 95% CI and p value were calculated. The p value of <0.05 was considered significant. Results: Of 85 patients, 44 (M: F=10:34) underwent ECCE and 41 (M: F=15:26) SICS (RR= 0.71, 95% CI=0.42-1.2, p value=0.16). Unaided visual acuity on the 1st postoperative day in the ECCE group was e"6/ 18 in 22.7%,<6/18-6/60 in 63.6 %,< 6/60 in 13.7%, whereas in the SICS group, the same was e"6/18 in 70.7%,<6/18-6/60 in 22 %,< 6/60 in 7.3% (95% CI = 0.23 - 0.48, p=0.001). Best corrected visual acuity on the 6th week follow-up in the ECCE group was e"6/18 in 79.5%,<6/18-6/60 in 18.2 %,< 6/60 in 2.3% and in the SICS group the same was 6/18 in 90.5% and <6/18-6/60 in 4.9% (95% CI=0.44 - 0.73; p=0.0012). Conclusion: Both ECCE and SICS are good procedures for hospital based community cataract surgery but within the 6 weeks postoperative period SICS gives better visual outcome. Remarkably higher number of female patients can be provided service in a hospital based community cataract programme as compared to males. Keywords: cataract; small incision; extra-capsular DOI: 10.3126/nepjoph.v1i2.3686 Nep J Oph 2009;1(2):118-122

scholarly journals A comparative study of post-operative astigmatism in superior versus superotemporal scleral incisions in manual small incision cataract surgery in a tertiary care hospital

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 009-015
Author(s):  
Hazra Soumyadeep ◽  
Saha Tapes Kanti
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Tertiary Care Hospital ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Visual Outcome ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Small Incision Cataract Surgery ◽  
Small Incision ◽  
Postoperative Astigmatism ◽  
Number Of Patients

Background: In developing countries, manual small incision cataract surgery is a better alternative and less expensive in comparison to phacoemulsification and thus the incision is an important factor causing high rates of postoperative astigmatism resulting into poor visual outcome. Thus, modifications to the site of the incision is needed to reduce the pre-existing astigmatism and also to prevent postoperative astigmatism. Modification to superotemporal incision relieves pre-existing astigmatism majorly due to its characteristic of neutralizing against-the-rule astigmatism, which is more prevalent among elderly population and thus improves the visual outcome. Aims: To study the incidence, amount and type of surgically induced astigmatism in superior and superotemporal scleral incision in manual SICS. Methodology: It is a randomized, comparative clinical study done on 100 patients attending the OPD of Ophthalmology at a tertiary care hospital, with senile cataract within a period of one year and underwent manual SICS. 50 of them chosen randomly for superior incision and rest 50 with superotemporal incision. MSICS with PCIOL implantation were performed through unsutured 6.5 mm scleral incision in all. Patients were examined post-operatively on 1st day, 7th day, 2nd week and 4th week and astigmatism was evaluated and compared in both groups. Results: It is seen that on postoperative follow up on 4th week, 77.78% of the patients with ATR astigmatism who underwent superior incision had increased astigmatism whereas, only 13.63% of the patients with ATR astigmatism who underwent supero-temporal incision, had increased astigmatism but 81.82% had decreased ATR astigmatism. However, 77.78% of the patients with preoperative WTR astigmatism who underwent supero-temporal incision, had increased astigmatism, whereas 44.45% of the patients with WTR astigmatism preoperatively, had increased astigmatism in contrast to 50% had decreased amount of astigmatism. It is also seen that the supero-temporal incision group had more number of patients (78%) with visual acuity better than 6/9 at 4th postoperative week than superior incision group (42%). Conclusion: This study concludes that superior incision cause more ATR astigmatism postoperatively whereas superotemporal incision causes lower magnitude of WTR astigmatism, which is advantageous for the elderly. Besides superotemporal incision provides better and early visual acuity postoperatively.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document