Comparison of the efficacy and invasiveness of manual and automated gonioscopy.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and invasiveness of manual gonioscopy and automated 360-degree gonioscopy. METHOD: Manual and automated gonioscopy were performed on 70 patients with glaucoma. Manual gonioscopy was performed by a glaucoma specialist and an ophthalmology resident, and automated gonioscopy (GS-1) was performed by orthoptists. We compared the examination time for acquiring gonioscopic images (GS-1: 16 directions; manual gonioscopy: 8 directions). Furthermore, we compared the pain and discomfort scores during the examination using the Individualized Numeric Rating Scale. Among the images acquired by automated gonioscopy, we also evaluated the percentages of acquired images that could be used to determine the angle opening condition. RESULTS: The examination time was not significantly different between manual (80.2±28.7) and automated gonioscopy (94.7±82.8) (p = 0.105). The pain score of automated gonioscopy (0.22±0.59) was significantly lower than that of manual gonioscopy (0.55±1.11) (p = 0.025). The discomfort score was not significantly different between manual (1.34±1.90) and automated gonioscopy (1.06±1.50) (p = 0.165). Automated gonioscopy successfully acquired clear gonioscopic images in 93.4% of the total images. CONCLUSION: Automated gonioscopy is comparable in examination time and invasiveness to manual gonioscopy and may be useful for 360-degree iridocorneal angle evaluation.

Clinical and ex vivo laboratory comparison of the self-sealing properties and dimensional stability between the femtosecond laser and manual clear corneal incisions.

PURPOSE: To compare the self-sealing features and dimensional stability between the femtosecond laser (FL) and manual knife corneal incision. METHODS: For the clinical study, 29 consecutive eyes from 29 patients and 28 eyes from 28 patients who underwent cataract surgery with FL corneal incision and manual knife incision, respectively, were enrolled. Immediately after cataract surgery, the self-sealing features of the corneal incisions were evaluated. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images were obtained. For the experimental study, clear corneal incisions with a knife or FL with different energy settings (3, 6 and 9 µJ) were created in fresh porcine eyes, followed by a stress test. The incision width was measured before and after the stress test. RESULTS: In the clinical study, the knife group had a higher self-sealing score (0.60 ± 0.49 points) than the FL group (0.17 ± 0.38 points). In the experimental study, the deformation rate in the knife incision (5.04 ± 1.93) was significantly lower than that in the FL with any energy. The deformation rate in the 9 µJ (12.98 ± 2.76) was significantly higher than in the 3 µJ (8.54 ± 2.38) and 6 µJ (8.82 ± 2.85) FL energies. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images revealed that the corneal stromal surface of the knife incision was smoother than that of the FL. Higher energy FL showed more irregular surfaces. CONCLUSION: Higher FL energy tended to widen a clear corneal incision when mechanical stress was applied. The histological differences at the inner tunnel surface may cause differences in wound stability of the corneal incision.