Article

Coaxial 2.2-mm microphaco technique reduces surgically induced astigmatism in study

S

Axis shift was minimal after surgery through either the 2.2-mm (13.1°) or 3-mm (19.4°) incisions, and there was no significant difference in the magnitude of axis shift between groups.

In the study, all surgeries were performed through a temporally oriented, grooved clear corneal tunnel incision using a phaco chop technique, and the Infiniti system with a 1.1-mm flared tip (Alcon Laboratories).

The coaxial microphaco technique used the new ultra-infusion sleeve (UltraSleeve) while the standard coaxial phacoemulsification was performed with a 3-mm silicone sleeve. IOL implantation was performed using the SN60C cartridge (Alcon) and Royale injector (ASICO).

No eyes had limbal relaxing incisions, surgical complications, or corneal pathology that might affect keratometry readings. Use of a Steinert gauge confirmed the 2.2-mm incisions were not enlarged after IOL implantation. At the end of the procedure, IOP was set at physiologic level and competence of incision closure was tested with fluorescein. There were no cases of wound leak or hypotony on postoperative day 1 in the series.

The keratometric data were analyzed arithmetically rather than with vector analysis to reflect changes in corneal curvature with respect to with or against the wound astigmatism and shift in axis of astigmatism.

"With the very small induced changes, results from an arithmetic analysis are more meaningful from a clinical perspective," Dr. Masket said.

Easy to perform

Dr. Masket observed that he has been very pleased with the ease and outcomes of coaxial microincision phacoemulsification because it involved essentially no learning curve, and it affords stable chambers intraoperatively and excellent postoperative results.

"Any phacoemulsification surgeon can easily transition to this new technique because it is performed with almost identical surgical parameters as standard coaxial surgery and is amenable to any approach to lens removal," he said.

There are a few minor differences to consider. For incision creation, Dr. Masket indicated he favors using a dull-sided diamond blade that consistently creates a 2.2-mm incision.

"Initially, I was using a steel blade, but my measurements showed it did not create a full 2.2-mm incision, and at some point during the procedure, the incision would be inadvertently stretched and even enlarged to greater than 2.2 mm," he explained.

Newsletter

Don’t miss out—get Ophthalmology Times updates on the latest clinical advancements and expert interviews, straight to your inbox.

Related Videos
(Image credit: Ophthalmology Times) From MIGS to gene therapy: Inder Paul Singh, MD, celebrates the past and future of glaucoma care
(Image credit: Ophthalmology Times) NeuroOp Guru: Using OCT to forecast outcomes in ethambutol optic neuropathy
(Image credit: Ophthalmology Times) Inside NYEE’s new refractive solutions center with Kira Manusis, MD
(Image credit: Ophthalmology Times) Dilsher Dhoot, MD, on the evolution of geographic atrophy therapy: where are we now?
(Image credit: Ophthalmology Times Europe) Anat Loewenstein, MD, shares insights on the real-world results of remote retinal imaging
(Image credit: Ophthalmology Times) Two-wavelength autofluorescence for macular xanthophyll carotenoids with Christine Curcio, PhD
(Image credit: Ophthalmology Times) FLIO and the brain: Making the invisible visible with Robert Sergott, MD
(Image credit: Ophthalmology Times) Structure-function correlates using high-res OCT images with Karl Csaky, MD, PhD
(Image credit: Ophthalmology Times) SriniVas Sadda, MD, on high-res OCT of atrophic and precursor lesions in AMD
© 2025 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.