Purchase this article with an account.
Melanie Wüst, Philipp Matten, Magdalena Nenning, Oliver Findl; Thickness of the Protective Layers of Different Ophthalmic Viscosurgical Devices During Lens Surgery in a Porcine Model. Trans. Vis. Sci. Tech. 2022;11(2):28. https://doi.org/10.1167/tvst.11.2.28.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
To evaluate the thickness of the intraoperative layers of 10 different ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVD) covering the corneal endothelium during simulated lens surgery in a porcine model.
This experimental study took place at the Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Austria. Ten OVDs with different viscoelastic properties (ProVisc, Z-Hyalin plus, Amvisc plus, DisCoVisc, Healon EndoCoat, Viscoat, Z-Hyalcoat, Combivisc, Duo-Visc, and Twinvisc) were assessed in 10 porcine eyes each, yielding a total of 100 eyes. Simulated cataract surgery was performed with volumetric intraoperative OCT imaging during phacoemulsification and during irrigation/aspiration to determine the remaining amount of OVD coating the endothelium over a scan field of 6 × 6 mm. Indirect visualization of the OVD was enabled by replacing the irrigating solution by a higher scattering diluted milk solution. A deep convolutional neural network (CNN) was used to evaluate OVD layer thickness based on the B-scans.
Median thickness values after phacoemulsification were lowest for the cohesive OVDs Z-Hyalin plus (38 µm) and ProVisc (39 µm), followed by the combination systems Twinvisc (342 µm) and Duo-Visc (537 µm). Highest values were observed for the dispersive OVDs and the combination system Combivisc (Viscoat: 957 µm; Z-Hyalcoat: 988 µm, Combivisc: 1042 µm; Amvisc plus: 1259 µm; Healon EndoCoat: 1303 µm; DisCoVisc: 1356 µm). The difference between the OVDs was statistically significant (P < 0.01).
The results of this study confirm that at completion of phacoemulsification, thickest residual layers of OVD remain when using dispersive substances, followed by combination systems and lowest thickness values were observed with cohesive OVDs. The use of an intraoperative OCT and a deep convolutional neural network allowed measurements over a large scan field of 6 × 6 mm and a precise evaluation of the OVD layer coating the corneal endothelium. The OVD layer seemed to be more like a ragged terrain instead of a flat layer, indicating that the film-forming effect of dispersive OVDs is the result of their volume rheology rather than a surface interaction.
Evaluating the protective properties provides valuable insights into how different OVDs with different viscoelastic properties form layers beneath the corneal endothelium and helps to understand their persistence during the various steps of cataract surgeries.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only