Comparison of visual outcome in senile cataract after phacoemulsification and manual small incision cataract surgery.

Israr Ahmed Bhutto; Irshad Ali; Maria Nazish Memon; Attaullah Shah Bukhari; Ikramuddin Indhar; Nasir Ahmed Memon

doi:10.29052/IJEHSR.v9.i2.2021.143-148

Israr Ahmed Bhutto Isra Postgraduate Institute of Ophthamology, Karachi-Pakistan
Irshad Ali Isra Postgraduate Institute of Ophthamology, Karachi-Pakistan
Maria Nazish Memon Liaquat University of Medical & Health Sciences, Jamshoro-Pakistan
Attaullah Shah Bukhari Khairpur Medical College, Khairpur-Pakistan
Ikramuddin Indhar Isra Postgraduate Institute of Ophthamology, Karachi-Pakistan
Nasir Ahmed Memon Isra Postgraduate Institute of Ophthamology, Karachi-Pakistan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.29052/IJEHSR.v9.i2.2021.143-148

Keywords: Vision, Cataract, Phacoemulsification.

Abstract

Background: Different surgical treatment options are used to treat cataracts, such as Manual Small Incision Cataract surgery (MSICS) and Phacoemulsification. The present study compares the visual outcomes of phacoemulsification and MSICS in senile cataract patients.

Methodology: A quasi-experimental study was conducted with 270 patients aged between 50 and 70. Patients diagnosed with senile cataract were included in the study and divided equally into two groups, Group A patients underwent MSICS, and Group B patients underwent Phacoemulsification. Pre-operative visual acuity and Postoperative visual acuity were assessed between the two groups on the 1^st day, 1^st week, and 1^st month.

Results: Significant difference (p=0.001) was observed on 1^st day of assessing uncorrected visual acuity among both interventional groups. However, no significant difference was observed in uncorrected visual acuity postoperatively on the 1^st week (p=0.093) and 1^st month (p=0.266).

Conclusion: Both Phacoemulsification and MSICS are beneficial surgical options to treat senile cataract, with both showing similar efficacy to one another.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Khurana AK, Khurana B. Comprehensive Ophthalmology: With Supplementary Book-Review of Ophthalmology.
2. Wang W, Yan W, Fotis K, Prasad NM, Lansingh VC, Taylor HR, Finger RP, Facciolo D, He M. Cataract surgical rate and socioeconomics: a global study. IOVS. 2016;57(14):5872-5881.
3. World Health Organization. Blindness and vision impairment. (Updated October 20, 2020). Available at: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/blindness-and-visual-impairment)
4. Bourne RR, Flaxman SR, Braithwaite T, Cicinelli MV, Das A, Jonas JB, Keeffe J, Kempen JH, Leasher J, Limburg H, Naidoo K. Magnitude, temporal trends, and projections of the global prevalence of blindness and distance and near vision impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2017;5(9):e888-97.
5. Fricke TR, Tahhan N, Resnikoff S, Papas E, Burnett A, Ho SM, Naduvilath T, Naidoo KS. Global prevalence of presbyopia and vision impairment from uncorrected presbyopia: systematic review, meta-analysis, and modelling. Ophthalmology. 2018;125(10):1492-1499.