ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
Comparative Safety and Energy Efficiency of Two Phaco Power Modulation Strategies in Diabetic Patients Undergoing Phacoemulsification.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: Given the reduced endothelial reserve and impaired pump function in diabetic corneas, optimizing phaco power modulation (PPM) may reduce intraoperative energy exposure and enhance corneal protection during phacoemulsification. This study aimed to compare the safety and energy efficiency of two PPM in diabetic patients undergoing phacoemulsification. Patients and Methods: Forty eyes of 40 diabetic patients with immature cataracts and no diabetic retinopathy were enrolled, requiring optical biometry-examinable cataracts (OBEC) and adequate preoperative imaging quality. Phacoemulsification was performed using a phaco-chop technique with a Venturi-based system. Patients were assigned to PPM 1 (30% power, 30% pulse, 70% duty cycle) or PPM 2 (50% power, 70% pulse, 50% duty cycle). Absolute phaco time (APT), effective phaco time (EPT), visual acuity, and central corneal thickness (CCT) were assessed preoperatively and up to 1 month postoperatively. Results: PPM 1 resulted in significantly lower APT compared with PPM 2 (49.6 vs 71.1 s; p = 0.007), while EPT did not differ significantly. Both groups showed significant visual improvement, with mean visual acuity improving to LogMAR 0.08 (PPM 1) and 0.18 (PPM 2) at 1 month, without a significant intergroup difference. CCT increased transiently on postoperative day 1 (to 595.7 µm in PPM 1 and 568.4 µm in PPM 2) and returned to near-baseline values by 1 month in both groups. Conclusion: Both PPM configurations were safe and effective in diabetic eyes, producing comparable visual improvement and reversible postoperative corneal thickening, supporting the use of either PPM in diabetic cataract surgery. Although PPM 1 achieved significantly lower APT, EPT and corneal recovery were similar between groups, indicating greater ultrasound efficiency without compromising corneal safety. Interpretation of these findings is limited by the small sample size, inclusion of only OBEC, and the use of CCT as an indirect surrogate of endothelial function.
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.