Elongation data are reported in
Table 2 for the phase 1 (sculpt) settings and in
Table 3 for phase 2 (quadrant removal) settings. When operating in BSS, the difference between requested and deployed elongation was not significant for either mode. In the sculpt phase (
Table 2), the feedback system allowed much more accurate control of elongation at both 35- and 70-µm nominal elongation (
Figs. 1 and
2). The difference in actual elongation between feedback control being off or on was significant at all agar gel concentrations (
P < 0.001), exceeding 60% of requested elongation for the denser 6% agar (
Fig. 2). When elongation feedback control was switched off, a significant reduction in elongation (nominal – actual elongation) occurred (
Fig. 2), especially when increasing the nominal elongation from 35 µm up to 70 µm (
P < 0.01). In the quadrant removal phase, feedback control allowed significantly higher accuracy, and elongation was almost perfectly on target, regardless of increasing agar gel resistance (1%–6%;
P < 0.001 at all nominal elongations) (
Table 3). In contrast, when feedback control was turned off, the difference between nominal and actual elongation changed significantly, both as agar gel resistance increased and as elongation rose (
P < 0.001 in all cases) (
Figs. 3,
4). The average elongation error with feedback control off also exceeded 60% at 30-µm elongation (
Fig. 4).
When emulsifying 6% agar gel spherules dispersed in BSS (
Figs. 5,
6), elongation accuracy proved significantly higher with feedback control on (
P < 0.001), as shown in
Table 4. Average actual elongation when the nominal value was 0 µm reached 44.02 µm with feedback control off compared to 60.02 µm when feedback control was turned on (
P < 0.001). When feedback control was turned off, not only was the elongation accuracy much worse but the variability of elongation was also much greater, as shown in
Figures 7 and
8. The mean squared error (
Table 4) was 10.92 with feedback control off and 2.67 when on. The much wider distributions of data around the average and related to requested elongation are clearly visible in
Figures 7 and
8, where the histograms show a much taller and narrower Gaussian curve when feedback control was turned on (
Fig. 8) compared to off (
Fig. 7).
Figures 9 and
10 “explode” 100 milliseconds of
Figures 5 and
6, respectively, in order to show in detail how the elongation and driving tension data changed as the tip engaged fragments of varying density. With feedback control off, elongation dropped well below nominal values to rebound as occlusion resolved (
Fig. 9), while tension remained unchanged. When the control mechanism was switched on, actual elongation remained consistently at nominal values, and the driving tension adjusted continuously to guarantee the requested elongation (
Fig. 10).
Figure 11 reports actual tip elongation in 6% agar gel fragments with feedback control off (blue curve, same as
Fig. 5) and simulates two possible scenarios depending on the actions the surgeon might take to compensate for elongation mismatch:
An estimate of dissipated energy with and without feedback system control was calculated as follows. The area under the curve (AUC; the integral of elongation function over time) covered by the blue line in
Figure 11 (feedback control off) was 69.5% of the AUC calculated when feedback control was switched on (but was an average of 15 µm less efficient) (
Table 4). When elongation was increased by the average loss (gray line in
Fig. 9), the AUC was equal to 99.6% of the AUC calculated with feedback control on (but elongation did not reached nominal value in about 50% of cases). When elongation was increased to entirely compensate for the maximum loss due to resistance (red line in
Fig. 11), the AUC was 1.2096 times the AUC when feedback control was switched on. Therefore, the amount of excess US energy necessary to achieve complete fragmentation of 6% agar gel spherules was on average 20.96% less when active feedback control for elongation was switched on.