Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Aug 14:17:2341-2347.
doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S416604. eCollection 2023.

Effect of Modified Peristaltic Phacoemulsification Device on Efficiency and Post-Occlusion Pressure Surge

Reiker G Ricks  1   2 , Ivan A Cardenas  1   2 , Emilie L Ungricht  1   2 , Randall J Olson  1 , Jeff H Pettey  1
Affiliations

Effect of Modified Peristaltic Phacoemulsification Device on Efficiency and Post-Occlusion Pressure Surge

Reiker G Ricks et al. Clin Ophthalmol. .

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate efficiency of grooving, nuclear fragment removal, and changes in pressure control in the Oertli Faros using traditional peristaltic and Speed and Precision (SPEEP) features. The SPEEP mode uses novel peristaltic technology permitting independent control of flow and vacuum.

Methods: A porcine lens model was used with an enclosed chamber simulating the anterior segment. Grooving efficiency is evaluated with flow rates of 10, 30, and 50 mL/min using whole lenses. Lens cubes were emulsified at 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100% power with both SPEEP and non-SPEEP modes. Surge was evaluated with pressure gauges placed on the irrigation tubing and aspiration tubing. Pressure readings were recorded per the following: fluid and vacuum were initiated for 15 seconds, vacuum tubing was occluded for 5 seconds, tubing patency was then re-introduced for 15 seconds. Differences between sensors were recorded.

Results: No significant increase in efficiency was seen with increasing flow rate from 30 to 50 mL/min using SPEEP. No significant differences were shown in lens fragment removal in SPEEP and non-SPEEP modes at any power tested. Pressure difference measurements were not significantly different with SPEEP and non-SPEEP modes.

Conclusion: We showed that lower flow rates show comparable efficiency of grooving when using the SPEEP mode. The SPEEP function did not show increased efficiency in nuclear fragment removal when compared to traditional mode. Surge control was also comparable with both SPEEP and non-SPEEP modes. We suggest that the SPEEP function included in the Oertli Faros may have some advantages.

Keywords: cataract; grooving; machine setting optimization; nuclear fragment removal; power; pump.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Dr. Olson is on the Board of Directors and equity owner of Perceive Bio and TMClear; Scientific Advisory Board and equity owner of Perfect Lens. Dr. Jeff Pettey reports a consulting agreement for Lensar and Zeiss, outside the submitted work. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Porcine lens placed in a groover device designed to simulate the anterior segment. Whole lens specimens or lens cubes are placed in the groover for experimental procedures.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Simulated occluded surgical scenario. Two pressure gauges were placed in series with pressure gauge 1 on the irrigation tubing and pressure gauge 2 on the aspiration tubing. The outflow tubing was manually occluded after pressure gauge 2, and the difference between the two gauges was used to determine anterior chamber pressure.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Average grooving times with increasing aspiration flow rate using SPEEP pump. Replicate trials (n=20) of grooving whole porcine lenses were averaged, and the average grooving time in seconds was compared across increasing flow rates. A one-way ANOVA showed no significant difference between the means.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Pressure in simulated anterior chamber before, during, and after occlusion of the tip with and without SPEEP. Pressure was measured in both SPEEP and non-SPEEP peristalsis (n = 20) using Dwyer digital pressure sensors. Replicate results were averaged and standard deviation is represented by error bars. A one-way ANOVA showed no significant difference between SPEEP and non-SPEEP prior to, during, and post-occlusion.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lam D, Rao SK, Ratra V, et al. Cataract. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2015;1(1):15014. doi:10.1038/nrdp.2015.14 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Benjamin L. Fluidics and rheology in phaco surgery: what matters and what is the hype? Eye. 2018;32(2):204–209. doi:10.1038/eye.2017.299 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Oertli® SPEEP – SPEED and precision. Berneck, Switzerland: Oertli Instrumente; 2021. Available from: https://www.oertli-instruments.com/en-us/surgical-platforms/catarhex-3/m.... Accessed March 13, 2023.
    1. Gilbert M, Zaugg B, Stagg B, et al. Safety profile of venturi versus peristaltic phacoemulsification pumps in cataract surgery using a capsular surrogate for the human lens. Am J Ophthalmol. 2015;160(1):179–184.e1. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2015.04.017 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cahoon JM, Gupta I, Gardiner G, et al. Comparison of venturi and peristaltic vacuum in phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015;41(2):428–432. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.12.043 - DOI - PubMed