Abstract
Purpose
To compare the complication rates and surgical duration of cataract surgery using two 3D visualization systems and a traditional binocular microscope among experienced and inexperienced surgeons.
Methods
This retrospective case series included 571 eyes that received cataract surgery using either heads up cataract surgery, via a 3D head mounted system (N = 148–Group 1) or a 3D display screen (N = 338 eyes–Group 2), or traditional binocular microscope (N = 85 eyes–Group 3). The surgical records of consecutive patients who underwent cataract surgery by two groups of surgeons (experienced and inexperienced) were reviewed. Patients in all groups received either femtosecond laser assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) or traditional phacoemulsification. Complication rate, as well as duration of cataract surgery were evaluated between all three visualization approaches, between experienced and inexperienced surgeons.
Results
There was no statistically significant difference in duration of surgery between all 3 visualization approaches for both experienced and inexperienced surgeons (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the type of surgical technique (manual or FLACS) did not affect the surgical duration for both experienced and inexperienced surgeons (p < 0.05). No intraoperative complications were demonstrated in the current cohort.
Conclusions
The implementation of heads up–3D visualization either through a screen or a head mounted platform for cataract surgery seems to offer similar safety and efficiency as the traditional binocular microscope, and both experienced and inexperienced surgeons demonstrate the same outcomes in terms of safety and efficiency.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.