This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.
‘Ample evidence’ microphaco is safe, effective
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts
PARIS — Microphacoemulsification is largely similar to coaxial phaco in terms of wound burn risk, efficacy and efficiency, according to one surgeon speaking here.
Randall J. Olson, MD, described the differences between microphaco and coaxial phaco in a presentation here at the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons meeting.
“Can we handle complicated surgery with microphaco?” he asked rhetorically. The answer: Yes, with an appropriate learning curve for the surgeon.
Wound burn risk is no greater with microphaco than with coaxial, he said. Microphaco wounds tend to leak, he warned.
Regarding efficacy, microphaco is “good for very hard cataracts,” Dr. Olson said. He said he has used microphaco on hypermature cataracts and in cases with iris prolapse, nanophthalmos and sectoral zonular loss.
Irrigation can be an issue with microphaco, Dr. Olson noted. “It’s generally a slower irrigation process than coaxial,” he said. Experienced surgeons should be able to compensate given a short learning curve, he added.
Anecdotal reports indicate that with the smaller incision used in microphaco there is less induced astigmatism, Dr. Olson said.
“There is ample evidence microphaco is safe and effective,” he said.