ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
Evaluation of the Occlusion Break Surge Volume in Five Different Phacoemulsification Systems.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Occlusion Break Surge and Anterior Chamber Stability in the Intraocular Environment of Modern Phacoemulsification: A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Comparing Post-Occlusion Surge at Decreasing Intraocular Pressures with Pressure Sensing Handpiece.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare surge volume after occlusion breaks in five phacoemulsification systems. Methods: A mechanical spring-eye model was used to evaluate the Legion™ Vision System with the Single Use Fluidics Management System (FMS) (LEG), Infiniti™ Vision System with Intrepid™ Plus FMS (INF), Whitestar Signature Pro Results: The minimum surge volume for all systems occurred at the highest IOP (80 mmHg) and the lowest tested vacuum limit (300 mmHg). Overall, the surge volume increased with increasing vacuum limit and decreasing IOP on the LEG, INF CIS, WSP, and SPC systems. The occlusion break surge volumes (µL [standard deviation]) at 60 mmHg IOP and vacuum limit of 500 mmHg were 70.4 [8.1] for LEG; 87.4 [9.7] for INF; 85.8 [7.2] for CIS; 69.5 [5.0] for WSP; and 151.7 [20.2]) for SPC. A Games-Howell post-hoc test showed significant differences between three groups: A) LEG/WSP, B) CIS/INF, and C) SPC. Conclusion: The Legion system demonstrated comparable or lower predicted surge volume after occlusion breaks compared to the other phacoemulsification systems evaluated. Reductions in occlusion break surge volumes are expected to decrease the rate of complications and lead to improved outcomes in the clinical cataract surgery setting.
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.