ArticleMedical devices (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
Comparison of Ultrasound Energy Delivered to the Anterior Segment Across Different Phacoemulsification Surgical Platforms.
Article in Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Energy Output Variability Among Phacoemulsification Tips Using Calorimetry.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to use calorimetry to understand the difference in energy transferred by three phacoemulsification surgical platforms to the eye. Patients and Methods: A phacoemulsification tip was lowered into a double-walled calorimeter filled with distilled water. The foot pedal was depressed for 30 seconds and the change in temperature of the water was measured by a temperature probe. Three phacoemulsification systems were compared: the Alcon Centurion, Johnson & Johnson Veritas and Oertli CataRhex 3. The following conditions remained constant across trials and platforms: continuous longitudinal ultrasound, flow rate 12mL/min, vacuum 0mmHg, and clamped inflow and outflow tubing. The different platforms were directly compared at 20%, 40%, 60%, 80% and 100% power. Results: A two-way ANOVA found a significant difference (P < 0.001) in overall energy output across all trials between the CataRhex 3, Centurion and Veritas with an F value of 63.97 and two degrees of freedom. Conclusion: Given identical settings, the amount of energy produced was significantly different across phacoemulsification platforms. This data can aid surgeons' understanding of how power level by surgical platform can impact the amount of energy introduced into the anterior segment during cataract surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.