open access

Vol 8 (2023): Continuous Publishing
Original paper
Published online: 2023-11-16
Get Citation

Manual small incision cataract surgery in dense cataract: Morocco comparative study

Taoufik Abdellaoui1, Soundouss Sebbata2, Yassine Mouzari2, Abdelbarre Oubaaz2
·
Ophthalmol J 2023;8:118-121.
Affiliations
  1. Department of Ophthalmology, Sidi Mohamed ben Abdellah University, Fes, Morocco
  2. Ophthalmology Department, Military Hospital Mohamed V, Rabat, Morocco

open access

Vol 8 (2023): Continuous Publishing
ORIGINAL PAPERS
Published online: 2023-11-16

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare manual small incision cataract surgery (MSICS) with phacoemulsification and manual extracapsular extraction in terms of corneal edema, endothelial loss, and induced astigmatism.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective study carried out in the ophthalmology department of the military hospital of Rabat in Morocco, including 15 eyes of 15 patients with brown cataracts. All patients were operated on by the same surgeon: 5 by phacoemulsification (PKE), 5 by manual extracapsular extraction (EEC) via corneal incision, and 5 by MSICS via tunneled sclero-corneal incision. Each patient underwent pre-, intra- and post-operative evaluation including: 1 — measurement of astigmatism before surgery and 3 months after (after removal of EEC threads); 2 — specular microscopy before and 3 months after surgery; 3 — clinical assessment of corneal edema before and at each follow-up: 1st and 7th day, 1st and 3rd month; 4 — evaluation of operating time.

RESULTS: 9 men and 6 women were included. Mean age was 67 years. The mean axial length was 22.98mm. All surgeries were uneventful, and all patients were implanted in the capsular bag with a monofocal implant. Initial endothelial cell count was comparable in the 3 groups (p = 0.48). The endothelial loss was most significant in the PKE group (16%), followed by the EEC group (5.1%) and then the MSICS group (4.5%) (p < 0.01). The change in corneal astigmatism was most significant in the EEC group (2.1D), followed by the MSICS group (0.88 D), then the PKE group (0.65 D) (p = 0.01). In the PKE group, all patients showed moderate to severe corneal edema at 1st postoperative, and in 2 cases, the edema persisted at the 7th day and then regressed at the 1st and 3rd month. Only 2 cases of moderate edema at day 1 in the EEC group, and 1 case in the MSICS group, regressed at the 7th day. Phacoemulsification was the least time-consuming, with an average operating time of 13 minutes, compared with 28 minutes for MSICS and 34 minutes for EEC (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: MSICS is a technique that resembles manual EEC, with a self-sealing tunneled scleral-corneal incision that avoids a full-thickness corneal incision and, consequently, sutures at the end of the procedure. It requires a learning curve. Our results concur with most of the data in the literature. MSICS is a safe technique, but it remains little used in cataract surgery. We believe that it should be preferred in patients with dense cataracts.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare manual small incision cataract surgery (MSICS) with phacoemulsification and manual extracapsular extraction in terms of corneal edema, endothelial loss, and induced astigmatism.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective study carried out in the ophthalmology department of the military hospital of Rabat in Morocco, including 15 eyes of 15 patients with brown cataracts. All patients were operated on by the same surgeon: 5 by phacoemulsification (PKE), 5 by manual extracapsular extraction (EEC) via corneal incision, and 5 by MSICS via tunneled sclero-corneal incision. Each patient underwent pre-, intra- and post-operative evaluation including: 1 — measurement of astigmatism before surgery and 3 months after (after removal of EEC threads); 2 — specular microscopy before and 3 months after surgery; 3 — clinical assessment of corneal edema before and at each follow-up: 1st and 7th day, 1st and 3rd month; 4 — evaluation of operating time.

RESULTS: 9 men and 6 women were included. Mean age was 67 years. The mean axial length was 22.98mm. All surgeries were uneventful, and all patients were implanted in the capsular bag with a monofocal implant. Initial endothelial cell count was comparable in the 3 groups (p = 0.48). The endothelial loss was most significant in the PKE group (16%), followed by the EEC group (5.1%) and then the MSICS group (4.5%) (p < 0.01). The change in corneal astigmatism was most significant in the EEC group (2.1D), followed by the MSICS group (0.88 D), then the PKE group (0.65 D) (p = 0.01). In the PKE group, all patients showed moderate to severe corneal edema at 1st postoperative, and in 2 cases, the edema persisted at the 7th day and then regressed at the 1st and 3rd month. Only 2 cases of moderate edema at day 1 in the EEC group, and 1 case in the MSICS group, regressed at the 7th day. Phacoemulsification was the least time-consuming, with an average operating time of 13 minutes, compared with 28 minutes for MSICS and 34 minutes for EEC (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: MSICS is a technique that resembles manual EEC, with a self-sealing tunneled scleral-corneal incision that avoids a full-thickness corneal incision and, consequently, sutures at the end of the procedure. It requires a learning curve. Our results concur with most of the data in the literature. MSICS is a safe technique, but it remains little used in cataract surgery. We believe that it should be preferred in patients with dense cataracts.

Get Citation

Keywords

dense cataract; MSICS; corneal edema; astigmatism; endothelial loss

About this article
Title

Manual small incision cataract surgery in dense cataract: Morocco comparative study

Journal

Ophthalmology Journal

Issue

Vol 8 (2023): Continuous Publishing

Article type

Original paper

Pages

118-121

Published online

2023-11-16

Page views

292

Article views/downloads

131

DOI

10.5603/oj.95767

Bibliographic record

Ophthalmol J 2023;8:118-121.

Keywords

dense cataract
MSICS
corneal edema
astigmatism
endothelial loss

Authors

Taoufik Abdellaoui
Soundouss Sebbata
Yassine Mouzari
Abdelbarre Oubaaz

References (7)
  1. Davis G. The Evolution of Cataract Surgery. Mo Med 2016, 113(1):58-62. 2016; 113(1): 58–62.
  2. Chauhan RA, Agrawal SO, Sawarkar RR, et al. Comparative study between conventional and 4 mm manual small-incision cataract surgery. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2022; 70(11): 3879–3882.
  3. George R, Rupauliha P, Sripriya AV, et al. Comparison of endothelial cell loss and surgically induced astigmatism following conventional extracapsular cataract surgery, manual small-incision surgery and phacoemulsification. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2005; 12(5): 293–297.
  4. Gurung A, Karki DB, Shrestha S, et al. Visual outcome of conventional extracapsular cataract extraction with posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation versus manual small-incision cataract surgery. Nepal J Ophthalmol. 2009; 1(1): 13–19.
  5. Pattanayak S, Mathur S, Nanda AK, et al. Postoperative astigmatic considerations in manual small-incision cataract surgery - A review. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2022; 70(11): 3785–3790.
  6. Gogate PM, Kulkarni SR, Krishnaiah S, et al. Safety and efficacy of phacoemulsification compared with manual small-incision cataract surgery by a randomized controlled clinical trial: six-week results. Ophthalmology. 2005; 112(5): 869–874.
  7. Ruit S, Tabin G, Chang D, et al. A prospective randomized clinical trial of phacoemulsification vs manual sutureless small-incision extracapsular cataract surgery in Nepal. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007; 143(1): 32–38.

Regulations

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

Publisher: VM Media Group sp. z o.o., Grupa Via Medica, 73 Świętokrzyska St., 80–180 Gdańsk

tel.:+48 58 310 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl