A fluidics comparison of Alcon Infiniti, Bausch & Lomb Stellaris, and Advanced Medical Optics Signature phacoemulsification machines

Abstract

Purpose: To compare three phacoemulsification machines for measurement accuracy and postocclusion surge (POS) in human cadaver eyes.

Design: In vitro comparisons of machine accuracy and POS.

Methods: Tip vacuum and flow were compared with machine indicated vacuum and flow. All machines were placed in two human cadaver eyes and POS was determined.

Results: Vacuum (% of actual) was 101.9% +/- 1.7% for Infiniti (Alcon, Fort Worth, Texas, USA), 93.2% +/- 3.9% for Stellaris (Bausch & Lomb, Rochester, New York, USA), and 107.8% +/- 4.6% for Signature (Advanced Medical Optics, Santa, Ana, California, USA; P < .0001). At 60 ml/minute flow, actual flow and unoccluded flow vacuum (UFV) was 55.8 +/- 0.4 ml/minute and 197.7 +/- 0.7 mm Hg for Infiniti, 53.5 +/- 0.0 ml/minute and 179.8 +/- 0.9 mm Hg for Stellaris, and 58.5 +/- 0.0 ml/minute and 115.1 +/- 2.3 mm Hg for Signature (P < .0001). POS in an 32-year-old eye was 0.33 +/- 0.05 mm for Infiniti, 0.16 +/- 0.06 mm for Stellaris, and 0.13 +/- 0.04 mm for Signature at 550 mm Hg, 60 cm bottle height, 45 ml/minute flow with 19-gauge tips (P < .0001 for Infiniti vs Stellaris and Signature). POS in an 81-year-old eye was 1.51 +/- 0.22 mm for Infiniti, 0.83 +/- 0.06 mm for Stellaris, 0.67 +/- 0.01 mm for Signature at 400 mm Hg vacuum, 70 cm bottle height, 40 ml/minute flow with 19-gauge tips (P < .0001).

Conclusions: Machine-indicated accuracy, POS, and UFV were statistically significantly different. Signature had the lowest POS and vacuum to maintain flow. Regarding POS, Stellaris was close to Signature; regarding vacuum to maintain flow, Infiniti and Stellaris were similar. Minimizing POS and vacuum to maintain flow potentially are important in avoiding ocular damage and surgical complications.