Performance, safety and efficiency comparison between a 25G 20,000 and a 10,000 cuts per minute vitrectomy: a prospective randomized control study
Abstract Background The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of 20,000 cuts per minute (cpm) with 10,000 cpm in vitreous cutters. Methods This was a prospective, parallel, single masked randomized control trial comparing the 25 gauge 20,000 cpm HYPERVIT Dual Blade from Alcon Labo...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2025-04-01
|
| Series: | International Journal of Retina and Vitreous |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40942-024-00613-w |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850181336155815936 |
|---|---|
| author | Shing Chuen Chow Jeffrey Man Yeung Lo Mehnaz Quddus Qing Li Wai Ching Lam Nicholas Siu Kay Fung |
| author_facet | Shing Chuen Chow Jeffrey Man Yeung Lo Mehnaz Quddus Qing Li Wai Ching Lam Nicholas Siu Kay Fung |
| author_sort | Shing Chuen Chow |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of 20,000 cuts per minute (cpm) with 10,000 cpm in vitreous cutters. Methods This was a prospective, parallel, single masked randomized control trial comparing the 25 gauge 20,000 cpm HYPERVIT Dual Blade from Alcon Laboratories, Fort Worth, TX, USA and 10,000 cpm ULTRAVIT vitrectomy cutter from Alcon Laboratories, Inc, Fort Worth, TX. Standard T-test by SPSS version 27 was used to compare efficiency and safety between two groups. Results In total 72 patients were recruited for the study and among them 71 patients completed the study. This study did not show any significant difference between 20,000 cpm probe and 10,000 cpm probe (p value = 0.347) for the core vitrectomy duration in all included eyes. The mean of core vitrectomy time was 269.28 s in the 25 gauge 20,000 cpm group and 289.44 s in the 25 gauge 10,000 cpm group. However, by comparing the two systems operated on epiretinal membrane eyes, 20,000 cpm probe had a significantly shorter mean core vitrectomy time than 10,000 cpm group (P = 0.03). The majority of all the patients had no intraoperative retinal tear (98.6.8%) and post-operative retinal tear (95.8%). There were no intraoperative iatrogenic breaks, and 3 postoperative retinal tears with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) were documented. All the retinal tears belongs to the 20,000 cpm group but no significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of retinal tear and complications. Conclusions 25-gauge 20,000 cpm Hypervit dual blade showed a faster trend in vitrectomy time although this was not statistically significant in all included eyes. By comparing vitrectomy time operated on epiretinal membrane eyes, a significant shorter time was found in 25-gauge 20,000 cpm. With more efficient and faster vitrectomy systems, the effect of surgeon factor likely plays a larger role. Our study suggest that the two devices may have a similar efficacy and safety. However, further studies may be needed to compare the core vitrectomy time between them after excluding the surgeon factor influence. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-773c05b90d7a46158f08e06b69d7541c |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2056-9920 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-04-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | International Journal of Retina and Vitreous |
| spelling | doaj-art-773c05b90d7a46158f08e06b69d7541c2025-08-20T02:17:56ZengBMCInternational Journal of Retina and Vitreous2056-99202025-04-011111810.1186/s40942-024-00613-wPerformance, safety and efficiency comparison between a 25G 20,000 and a 10,000 cuts per minute vitrectomy: a prospective randomized control studyShing Chuen Chow0Jeffrey Man Yeung Lo1Mehnaz Quddus2Qing Li3Wai Ching Lam4Nicholas Siu Kay Fung5The Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong KongThe Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong KongThe Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong KongQueen Mary Hospital & Grantham HospitalThe Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong KongThe Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong KongAbstract Background The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of 20,000 cuts per minute (cpm) with 10,000 cpm in vitreous cutters. Methods This was a prospective, parallel, single masked randomized control trial comparing the 25 gauge 20,000 cpm HYPERVIT Dual Blade from Alcon Laboratories, Fort Worth, TX, USA and 10,000 cpm ULTRAVIT vitrectomy cutter from Alcon Laboratories, Inc, Fort Worth, TX. Standard T-test by SPSS version 27 was used to compare efficiency and safety between two groups. Results In total 72 patients were recruited for the study and among them 71 patients completed the study. This study did not show any significant difference between 20,000 cpm probe and 10,000 cpm probe (p value = 0.347) for the core vitrectomy duration in all included eyes. The mean of core vitrectomy time was 269.28 s in the 25 gauge 20,000 cpm group and 289.44 s in the 25 gauge 10,000 cpm group. However, by comparing the two systems operated on epiretinal membrane eyes, 20,000 cpm probe had a significantly shorter mean core vitrectomy time than 10,000 cpm group (P = 0.03). The majority of all the patients had no intraoperative retinal tear (98.6.8%) and post-operative retinal tear (95.8%). There were no intraoperative iatrogenic breaks, and 3 postoperative retinal tears with rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) were documented. All the retinal tears belongs to the 20,000 cpm group but no significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of retinal tear and complications. Conclusions 25-gauge 20,000 cpm Hypervit dual blade showed a faster trend in vitrectomy time although this was not statistically significant in all included eyes. By comparing vitrectomy time operated on epiretinal membrane eyes, a significant shorter time was found in 25-gauge 20,000 cpm. With more efficient and faster vitrectomy systems, the effect of surgeon factor likely plays a larger role. Our study suggest that the two devices may have a similar efficacy and safety. However, further studies may be needed to compare the core vitrectomy time between them after excluding the surgeon factor influence.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40942-024-00613-wVitrectomyCore duration of vitrectomyIntraoperative retinal tearPost-operative retinal tearIntraoperative complicationPostoperative complication |
| spellingShingle | Shing Chuen Chow Jeffrey Man Yeung Lo Mehnaz Quddus Qing Li Wai Ching Lam Nicholas Siu Kay Fung Performance, safety and efficiency comparison between a 25G 20,000 and a 10,000 cuts per minute vitrectomy: a prospective randomized control study International Journal of Retina and Vitreous Vitrectomy Core duration of vitrectomy Intraoperative retinal tear Post-operative retinal tear Intraoperative complication Postoperative complication |
| title | Performance, safety and efficiency comparison between a 25G 20,000 and a 10,000 cuts per minute vitrectomy: a prospective randomized control study |
| title_full | Performance, safety and efficiency comparison between a 25G 20,000 and a 10,000 cuts per minute vitrectomy: a prospective randomized control study |
| title_fullStr | Performance, safety and efficiency comparison between a 25G 20,000 and a 10,000 cuts per minute vitrectomy: a prospective randomized control study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Performance, safety and efficiency comparison between a 25G 20,000 and a 10,000 cuts per minute vitrectomy: a prospective randomized control study |
| title_short | Performance, safety and efficiency comparison between a 25G 20,000 and a 10,000 cuts per minute vitrectomy: a prospective randomized control study |
| title_sort | performance safety and efficiency comparison between a 25g 20 000 and a 10 000 cuts per minute vitrectomy a prospective randomized control study |
| topic | Vitrectomy Core duration of vitrectomy Intraoperative retinal tear Post-operative retinal tear Intraoperative complication Postoperative complication |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40942-024-00613-w |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT shingchuenchow performancesafetyandefficiencycomparisonbetweena25g20000anda10000cutsperminutevitrectomyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolstudy AT jeffreymanyeunglo performancesafetyandefficiencycomparisonbetweena25g20000anda10000cutsperminutevitrectomyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolstudy AT mehnazquddus performancesafetyandefficiencycomparisonbetweena25g20000anda10000cutsperminutevitrectomyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolstudy AT qingli performancesafetyandefficiencycomparisonbetweena25g20000anda10000cutsperminutevitrectomyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolstudy AT waichinglam performancesafetyandefficiencycomparisonbetweena25g20000anda10000cutsperminutevitrectomyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolstudy AT nicholassiukayfung performancesafetyandefficiencycomparisonbetweena25g20000anda10000cutsperminutevitrectomyaprospectiverandomizedcontrolstudy |