Comparative analysis of central corneal thickness changes after cataract surgery at a tertiary hospital, North Central Nigeria
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20260933Keywords:
Cataract surgery, CCT, ECCE, MSICSAbstract
Background: Cataract surgery is the most frequently performed ophthalmic surgery to restore vision, so it is imperative for any surgeon performing cataract surgery to consider the health status of a cornea, most especially the central corneal thickness and document these parameters pre and post operatively for good visual outcome.
This study aims to assess the effect of conventional extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) and manual small incision cataract surgery (MSICS) on central corneal thickness (CCT) in eyes of Nigerian adults with age-related uncomplicated cataract in order to obtain relevant information that will aid in improving cataract surgical outcome.
Methods: This was a hospital based prospective interventional study where all consecutive patients 40years and above with uncomplicated age-related cataract that presented to the hospital and fulfilled the inclusion criteria were recruited into the study until the minimum sample size was obtained. Two hundred and seventy-seven (277) cataract eyes of 269 patients were randomly selected and assigned to either MSICS or conventional ECCE with posterior chamber intraocular lens (PC IOL) implantation. Preoperatively the CCT was measured with a non-contact specular microscope. Post operatively these measurements were repeated at 1 week, 4 weeks and 12 weeks respectively.
Results: Of the 277 eyes studied, 263 (94.9%) were analysed. The mean age of patient for MSICS and ECCE was 64.03 (SD+11.2, range 40–95 years) and 62.69 (SD+10.48, range 42–94 years) respectively with male to female ratio of 1.9: 1. CCT increased in both groups at one week postoperatively but these values returned to preoperative values at 12 weeks after surgery.
Conclusions: The two cataract procedures induced a similar and transient increase in CCT postoperatively with return to normal values at 12 weeks.
Metrics
References
Burton MJ, Ramke J, Marques AP, Bourne RR, Congdon N, Jones I. The Lancet Global Health Commision on Global Eye Health: Vision 2020. Lancet Global Health. 2021;9(4):431. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30488-5
Rabiu, M. Mansur, Kyari Fatima, Ezelum Christian, Elhassan, Elizabeth Sanda, et al. Review of the publications of the Nigeria national blindness survey. Methodology, prevalence, causes of blindness and visual impairment and outcome of cataract surgery. Nigerian J Eye Disease. 2012;14(5):8759.
Briceno-Lopez C, Burguera-Giménez N, García-Domene MC. Corneal Edema after Cataract Surgery. J Clin Med. 2023;12:6751. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12216751
Bamdad S, Bolkheir A, Sedaghat MR. Changes in corneal thickness and corneal endothelial cell density after phacoemulsification cataract surgery: A double-blind randomized trial. Electron Physician. 2018;10:6616–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19082/6616
Abell RG, Kerr NM, Howie AR. Effect of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery on the corneal endothelium. J Cataract Refract. 2014;40:1777–83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.05.031
Li X, He Y, Su T. Comparison of clinical outcomes between cystotome-assisted prechop phacoemulsification surgery and conventional phacoemulsification surgery for hard nucleus cataracts: A CONSORT-compliant article. Medicine. 2018;97:13124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000013124
Behndig, A., Lundberg, B. Transient corneal edema after phacoemulsification: Comparison of 3 viscoelastic regimens. J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 2002, 28, 1551–1556. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0886-3350(01)01219-6
Jeancolas AL, Lhuillier L, Renaudin L. Central corneal thickness assessment after phacoemulsification: Subluxation versus Divide-and-Conquer. J Fr Ophtalmol. 2017;40:744–750. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfo.2017.02.013
Kuerten D, Plange N, Koch EC. Central corneal thickness determination in corneal edema using ultrasound pachymetry, a Scheimpflug camera and anterior segment OCT. Graefe’s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2015;253:1105–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-2998-y
Wongchaisuwat N, Metheetrairat A, Chonpimai P. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements in corneal edema using ultrasound pachymetry, visante anterior-segment optical coherence tomography, cirrus optical coherence tomography and pentacam scheimpflug camera tomography. Clin Ophthalmol. 2018;12:1865–73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S172159
Sadoughi MM, Einollahi B. Measurement of central corneal thickness using ultrasound pachymetry and orbscan ii in normal eyes. J Ophthalmic Vis Res. 2015;10(1):49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/2008-322X.156084
Li Y, Kim H, Joo C. Early changes in corneal edema following torsional phacoemulsification using anterior segment optical coherence tomography and Scheimpflug photography. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2011;55:196–204. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10384-011-0007-5
Wertheimer CM, Elhardt C, Wartak A. Corneal optical density in Fuchs endothelial dystrophy determined by anterior segment optical coherence tomography. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2021;31:1771–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1120672120944796
Salmon JF. Kanksi's Synopsis of Clinical Ophthalmology-E-Book. Elsevier Health Sciences. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-7020-8373-0.00019-1
Lhuillier L, Jeancolas AL, Renaudin L. Impact of ophthalmic surgeon experience on early postoperative central corneal thickness after cataract surgery. Cornea. 2017;36:541–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0000000000001175
Araoye MO. Research methodology with statistics for health and social sciences. Ilorin: Nathadex Publisher. 2003;115(9):25-120.
Odugbo OP, Mypet CD, Chiroma MP, Aboje AO. Cataract blindness, Surgical Coverage, Outcome and Barriers to uptake of Cataract Services in Plateau State, Nigeria. Middle East African J Ophthalmol. 2012;19:282-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-9233.97925
Rabiu MM, Cataract blindness and barriers to uptake of cataract services in a rural community of Northern Nigeria. Br J Ophthalmol. 2001;85:776-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.85.7.776
Cheng H, Bates AK, Wood L. Positive correlation of corneal thickness and endothelial cell loss. Arch Ophthalmol. 1988;106:920–2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.1988.01060140066026
Temitayo O, Olusesan AA. Central corneal thickness changes following manual small incision cataract surgery, Clinical Ophthalmol. 2015;3:151-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S75580
Pipat K. Central corneal thickness changes following manual small incision cataract surgery versus phacoemulsification for white cataract. Romanian J Ophthalmol. 2019;63(1):61-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22336/rjo.2019.10
Deshpande S, Agarwal A, Shah P, Gala Y. Study of central corneal thickness (CCT) before and after small-incision cataract surgery (SICS) and phacoemulsification surgery. Niger J Ophthalmol. 2018;26:35-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/njo.njo_30_16
Gogate PM, Kulkarni SR, Krishnaiah S. Safety and efficacy of phacoemulsification compared with manual small incision cataract surgery by a randomized controlled clinical trial: six-week results. Ophthalmology. 2005;112:869-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.11.055
Ruit S, Tabin G, Chang D. A prospective randomized clinical trial of phacoemulsification vs manual sutureless small-incision extracapsular cataract surgery in Nepal. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;143:32-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2006.07.023
Venkatesh R, Tan CS, Singh GP, Veena K, Krishnan KT, Ra vindran RD. Safety and efficacy of manual small incision cataract surgery for brunescent and black cataracts. Eye. 2009;23:1155-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2008.190
Gogate P, Deshpande M, Nirmalan PK. Why do phacoemul sification. Manual small-incision cataract surgery is almost as effective, but less expensive. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:965-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.08.057
Goldenberg D, Wilner ZH. Endothelial cells and central corneal thickness after modified sutureless manual small-incision cataract surgery. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2013;23(5):658-63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5301/ejo.5000251