Vol 2, No 2 (2017)
Review paper
Published online: 2017-06-28

open access

Page views 679
Article views/downloads 1547
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

1.8-mm coaxial microincision cataract surgery with the Stellaris Vision Enhancement System

Ioannis Mallias1, Panagiota Mylova1, Anastasia Tassiopoulou1
Ophthalmol J 2017;2(2):54-57.

Abstract

The purpose of this review is to analyse the benefits of phacoemulsification with 1.8-mm coaxial microincision cataract surgery using the Stellaris Vision Enhancement System. The Stellaris operating system and its advantages are explained and analysed. Other techniques are also referred to. The surgical technique of 1.8-mm microincision cataract surgery using Stellaris is described and some essential and helpful tips are explained. The Stellaris Enhancement System makes 1.8-mm microincision cataract surgery fast and easy for the surgeon, leading to high rates of patient satisfaction from the first postoperative days.

References

  1. McDonald JE. Comparison of postoperative flare/cells after microincision cataract surgery compared to small incision cataract surgery. Presented at ASCRS Symposium on Cataract, IOL and Refractive Surgery.
  2. Han Y, Wang J. [New progresses in micro-incision cataract surgery]. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2012; 48(4): 369–373.
  3. Braga-Mele R. Is smaller truly better? An evaluation of phaco incision size and astigmatism. Presented at AAO Annual meeting. San Francisco, 2009.
  4. Zafirakis P. Stellaris phaco platform versus Infinity torsional phaco mode. Presented at ASCRS Annual meeting. San Francisco, 2009.
  5. Heng WJ. Surgically induced astigmatism in standard vs microincision coaxial phacoemulsification. Presented at the 11th Conference of the China Cataract Society in Xi’an China, 2008.
  6. Barrett GD. Minimizing astigmatism and improving wound security. Presented at Asia-Pacific Academy of Ophthalmology, 2009.
  7. Hunkeler JD. Comparison of BSS usage between Stellaris MICS and Infinity intrepid. Presented at ASCRS Annual Meeting. Boston, 2010.
  8. Agarwal A, Agarwal A, Jacob S. Phacoemulsification. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd., Panama City 2011: 227–235.
  9. Bausch&Lomb. Pressurized infusion field observation study #606;2009.
  10. Belkin A, Abulafia A, Michaeli A, et al. Wound temperature profiles of coaxial mini-incision versus sleeveless microincision phacoemulsification. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2017; 45(3): 247–253.
  11. Hamza I. Wound burn in MICS with OZil Custom Pulse Mode. Presented at 2008 ASCRS film festival, Chicago, IL, 2008, April 4-9.
  12. The FDA “Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience” (MAUDE) database . http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/SCRIPTS/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/Search.cfm.
  13. Schafer ME. Thermal response of phacoemulsification tips in normal and occluded conditions. Presented at the ESCRS Congress. Barcelona, 2009, Sept. 15.
  14. Olson RJ, Chan C, Bradley M, et al. An Analysis of Wound Burns in the US and Canada. Poster presented at ASCRS Symposium on Cataract, IOL and Refractive Surgery. Boston, MA, 2010.