Evaluación de la cirugía de la catarata asistida con láser femtosegundo tras 10 años de aplicación clínica
- A. Piñero 1
- P. Kanclerz 2
- R.I. Barraquer 378
- M.J. Maldonado 5
- J.L. Alió 46
- 1 Fellow Curso online Experto Universitario en Cirugía Refractiva, Córnea y Catarata, Clínica Piñero, Sevilla, España
- 2 Hygeia Clinic, Gdańsk, Polonia
-
3
Barraquer Centro de Oftalmología
info
-
4
Universidad Miguel Hernández de Elche
info
-
5
Instituto de Oftalmología Aplicada de Valladolid
info
Instituto de Oftalmología Aplicada de Valladolid
Valladolid, España
-
6
Instituto Oftalmologico de Alicante
info
Instituto Oftalmologico de Alicante
Alicante, España
-
7
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
info
-
8
Universitat Internacional de Catalunya
info
ISSN: 0365-6691
Year of publication: 2020
Volume: 95
Issue: 11
Pages: 528-537
Type: Article
More publications in: Archivos de la Sociedad Española de Oftalmologia
Abstract
Introduction Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) has been considered a technological advance in modern cataract surgery. After years of experience, it has been observed that clinical outcomes had more complications than expected at the beginning. The aim of this study is to compare the benefits and disadvantages of the FLACS technique with conventional cataract surgery. Method The PubMed and Web of Science platforms were used to search for scientific literature. Results The FLACS has currently improved the surgical technique in terms of the shorter ultrasound time used and the lower loss of endothelial cells. Likewise, the centration of capsulotomy and the correction of astigmatism with arcuate incisions have also been improved. As disadvantages, are the high cost of the laser, the intraoperative capsular complications, the induction of intraoperative myosis, and the learning curve of the technique. Conclusions The FLACS technique is considered beneficial for specific cases, such as patients with scheduled premium surgery, or with low endothelial cell count. However, it is believed that given the technological cost it is not a cost effective technique for most standard cases in our daily clinical practice.