A comparative study of complications of cataract surgery with phacoemulsification in eyes with high and normal axial length

Fesharaki, Hamid; Peyman, Alireza; Rowshandel, Mehdi; Peyman, Mohammadreza; Alizadeh, Pegah; Akhlaghi, Mohammadreza; Ashtari, AliReza

A comparative study of complications of cataract surgery with phacoemulsification in eyes with high and normal axial length

Authors

¹ Isfahan Eye Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

² Department of Ophthalmology, University of Malaya, Medical Center, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Abstract

Background: This study performed to assess the safety of cataract extraction with phacoemulsification and intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in patients with high axial length compared with patients with normal axial length.
Materials and Methods: A total of 866 eyes were enrolled in this study; all subjects underwent phacoemulsification and IOL implantation for treatment of cataract. Seven hundred and nine eyes fell in the normal group with axial lengths ranging between 21 and 24.5 mm, and 157 eyes were considered myopic with axial length equal or greater than 26 mm. The two groups were compared regarding intraoperative surgical complications, such as vitreous loss, posterior capsular rupture, nucleolus drop, and undesirable implantation of IOL in the anterior chamber.
Results: Age was a risk factor in both groups, with each year increase of age, the chance of incidence of intraoperative complications increased 1.04-folds ( P = 0.03). And with 1 mm increase in axial length, the incidence of complications raised 1.22-folds ( P = 0.007). There was no significant correlation between axial length and incidence of vitreous loss, although the incidence of posterior capsular rupture and nucleus fragment drops increased with increment in the axial length. Sex of the patients and side of the left or right eye were not found to be significant risk factors.
Conclusions: As the results illustrate, in this survey, age and high axial length were statistically significant risk factors for incidence of intraoperative complications of cataract surgery with phacoemulsification technique. Anticipation of these complications and also preparation and prophylactic measures may decrease incidence of these complications.

Keywords

References

1.	Abraham AG, Condon NG, West Gower E. The new epidemiology of cataract. Ophthalmol Clin North Am 2006;19:415-25. [PUBMED]
2.	Maberley DA, Hollands H, Chuo J, Tam G, Konkal J, Roesch M, et al. The prevalence of low vision and blindness in Canada. Eye 2006;20:341-6. [PUBMED]
3.	Congdon NG, Friedman DS, Lietman T. Important causes of visual impairment in the world today. JAMA 2003;290:2057-60. [PUBMED]
4.	Javitt JC, Wang F, West SK. Blindness due to cataract: Epidemiology and prevention. Annu Rev Public Health 1996;17:159-77. [PUBMED]
5.	Brian G, Taylor H. Cataract blindness-challenges for the 21st century. Bull World Health Organ 2001;79:249-56. [PUBMED]
6.	Iusef IuN, Iusef Siu, Reznikova EV, Vvedenskiĭ AS. Cataract surgery in patients with high myopia. Vestn Oftalmol 2005;121:47-9.
7.	Seward H, Packard R, Allen D. Management of cataract surgery in a high myope. Br J Ophthalmol 2001;85:1372-8. [PUBMED]
8.	Kelman CD. Symposium: Phacoemulsification. History of emulsification and aspiration of senile cataracts. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol 1974;78:OP5-13. [PUBMED]
9.	Kelman CD. Symposium: Phacoemulsification. Summary of personal experience. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol 1974;78:35-8. [PUBMED]
10.	Cotlier E, Rose M. Cataract extraction by the intracapsular methods and by phacoemulsification: The results of surgeons in training. Trans Sect Ophthalmol Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol 1976;81:163-82. [PUBMED]
11.	Girard LJ, Hawkins RS. Cataract extraction by ultrasonic aspiration vitrectomy by ultrasonic aspiration. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol 1974;78:50-9. [PUBMED]
12.	Chee SP, Ti SE, Sivakumar M, Tan DT. Postoperative inflammation: Extracapsular cataract extraction versus phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg 1999;25:1280-5. [PUBMED]
13.	Dowler JG, Hykin PG, Hamilton AM. Phacoemulsification versus extracapsular cataract extraction in patients with diabetes. Ophthalmology 2000;107:457-62. [PUBMED]
14.	Katsimpris JM, Petropoulos IK, Apostolakis K, Feretis D. Comparing phacoemulsification and extracapsular cataract extraction in eyes with pseudoexfoliation syndrome, small pupil, and phacodonesis. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd 2004;221:328-33. [PUBMED]
15.	Cheng JW, Wei RL, Li Y. Effect of phacoemulsification versus extracapsular extraction on visual acuity: A meta-analysis. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi 2004;40:474-7.
16.	Tous HM, Nevárez J. Comparison of outcomes following combined ECCE-trabeculectomy versus phacoemulsification-trabeculectomy. P R Health Sci J 2006;25:319-23.
17.	Arbisser LB, Charles S, Howcroft M, Werner L. Management of vitreous loss and dropped nucleus during cataract surgery. Ophthalmol Clin North Am 2006;19:495-506. [PUBMED]
18.	Dickinson PJ, Greven CM. Avoiding and managing the dislocated crystalline lens. Compr Ophthalmol Update 2006;7:113-27. [PUBMED]
19.	Arbisser LB. Managing intraoperative complications in cataract surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2004;15:33-9. [PUBMED]
20.	Kim IK, Miller JW. Management of dislocated lens material. Semin Ophthalmol 2002;17:162-6. [PUBMED]

Advanced Biomedical Research