Light exposure from microscope versus intracameral illumination during cataract surgery

Purpose: To evaluate light exposure from microscope versus intracameral illuminations to patient's and surgeon's retina during cataract surgery. Methods: Thirty consecutive patients who had cataract surgery using microscope and intracameral illuminations. At the point of the ocular of an operating microscope, optical illuminance and irradiance from the microscope illumination (60, 40, 20% intensity) and the intracameral illumination (60% intensity) were measured using a light meter and a spectrometer at a pause after lens capsule polishing in cataract surgery. Results: Average illuminance (lux) was 1.46, 0.66, 0.27, and 0.1 from 60%, 40%, 20% intensity microscope illuminations and 60% intracameral illumination. Average total spectral irradiance (?W/cm2) was 1.25, 0.65, 0.26, and 0.03 from 60%, 40%, 20% intensity microscope illuminations and 60% intracameral illumination. Conclusion: Microscope ocular illuminance and irradiance during cataract surgery were higher in the microscope illumination than in the intracameral illumination. It suggests that light exposure reaching patient's and surgeon's retina during cataract surgery is lower in the intracameral illumination than in the microscope illumination.

Comparison of Posterior Capsule Rupture Rate during Phacoemulsification by Novice Ophthalmologists: Microscope vs. Intracameral Illumination

PURPOSE: We compared the posterior capsule rupture (PCR) rate between microscope versus intracameral illumination in phacoemulsification surgery performed by novice ophthalmologists. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of 300 eyes of 211 patients who underwent phacoemulsification by novice ophthalmologists from March 2012 to October 2017. Novice ophthalmologists (n = 6) were divided into those using microscope illumination (n = 4) and intracameral illumination users (n = 2). The first 50 cataract surgery cases of each novice ophthalmologist were reviewed. The results using a phacoemulsification machine and microscopy were the same. The intraoperative complications and learning curve in each case were evaluated. RESULTS: Phacoemulsifications performed by novice ophthalmologists showed a statistically significant difference in PCR rate between the microscope illumination (19.0%, 38/200) and intracameral illumination (4.0%, 4/100) groups (p = 0.001). The incidence of PCR was reduced to 22%, 18%, 16%, 12%, and 8% per 10 cases in the microscope group, while it was 15% in the first 10 cases and 0% in 50 cases thereafter in the intracameral illumination group. CONCLUSIONS: Novice surgeons had a lower PCR rate during cataract surgery using intracameral illumination than using microscope illumination. Both groups showed a tendency for the PCR to decrease with increasing surgical cases, but the intracameral illumination group showed a shorter learning curve.