Limits...
A comparison of pop and chop to divide and conquer in resident cataract surgery

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

In this randomized prospective study, the cumulative dissipated energy and case time of pop and chop and of traditional four-quadrant divide and conquer in the first 60 cases (in total 120 eyes) of cataract surgery performed by two residents at the Veterans Administration Hospital in Hampton, Virginia, were compared. Overall and individually, the residents had significantly shorter case times and used significantly less cumulative dissipated energy for performing pop and chop than that for divide and conquer technique. There was no difference in complication rates or visual outcomes between these two techniques. The results of this study suggest that pop and chop is a more time- and energy-efficient method of nucleofractis than divide and conquer for novice resident surgeons.

No MeSH data available.


Final best corrected VA.Abbreviation: VA, visual acuity.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5036651&req=5

f3-opth-10-1847: Final best corrected VA.Abbreviation: VA, visual acuity.

Mentions: Final best corrected visual acuity of ≥20/40 was achieved in 90% of patients in the pop and chop group and 95% in the divide and conquer group. After excluding patients with preexisting retinal pathologies (five had age-related macular degeneration and one had a macular hole), 100% of patients in the pop and chop group and 99% of the patients in the divide and conquer group achieved 20/40 or better vision (Figure 3).


A comparison of pop and chop to divide and conquer in resident cataract surgery
Final best corrected VA.Abbreviation: VA, visual acuity.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5036651&req=5

f3-opth-10-1847: Final best corrected VA.Abbreviation: VA, visual acuity.
Mentions: Final best corrected visual acuity of ≥20/40 was achieved in 90% of patients in the pop and chop group and 95% in the divide and conquer group. After excluding patients with preexisting retinal pathologies (five had age-related macular degeneration and one had a macular hole), 100% of patients in the pop and chop group and 99% of the patients in the divide and conquer group achieved 20/40 or better vision (Figure 3).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

In this randomized prospective study, the cumulative dissipated energy and case time of pop and chop and of traditional four-quadrant divide and conquer in the first 60 cases (in total 120 eyes) of cataract surgery performed by two residents at the Veterans Administration Hospital in Hampton, Virginia, were compared. Overall and individually, the residents had significantly shorter case times and used significantly less cumulative dissipated energy for performing pop and chop than that for divide and conquer technique. There was no difference in complication rates or visual outcomes between these two techniques. The results of this study suggest that pop and chop is a more time- and energy-efficient method of nucleofractis than divide and conquer for novice resident surgeons.

No MeSH data available.