Open AccessVitrectorhexis versus forceps posterior capsulorhexis in pediatric cataract surgery
Author(s) -
Lav Kochgaway,
Partha Biswas,
Aloke Paul,
Sourav Sinha,
Rupak Biswas,
Puspen Maity,
Sumita Banerjee
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
indian journal of ophthalmology/indian journal of ophthalmology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.542
H-Index - 51
eISSN - 1998-3689
pISSN - 0301-4738
DOI - 10.4103/0301-4738.101066
Subject(s) - capsulorhexis , medicine , forceps , surgery , ophthalmology , cataract surgery , phacoemulsification , visual acuity
This study was done to compare the results of posterior continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis created using forceps with those created using vitrector in eyes suffering from congenital cataract. Vitrectorhexis term was first used by Wilson et al in 1999. [1] Fifty eyes with congenital and developmental cataract were included in this study. The posterior capsulorhexis was created using utrata forceps in 17 eyes or through a vitrector in 33 eyes. Forceps capsulorhexis was performed before IOL implantation, while vitrectorhexis was performed after IOL implantation in the bag. The results of both the surgery were compared using the following criteria: incidence of extension of rhexis, ability to achieve posterior rhexis of appropriate size, ability to implant the IOL in the bag, the surgical time, and learning curve. Vitrectorhexis after IOL implantation was an easy to learn alternative to manual posterior continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis in pediatric cataract surgery. It was more predictable and reproducible, with a short learning curve and lesser surgical time.