Comparison of pupillary diameter variation between conventional phacoemulsification versus femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery

Pupil Status with Low-Energy Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery versus Conventional Phacoemulsification: An Intraindividual Comparative Study

“…Our study’s results agree with the published literature regarding the same type of femtosecond pulse. 18 , 19 , 22 No significant pupil changes were observed in the present study with low-energy FLACS, in contrast with the reported common association of laser-induced myosis with high-energy and low-frequency femtosecond pulse machines available in the market. 23 , 24 Again, the rationale for this difference may be that smaller laser spots, as produced by a high numerical aperture in the laser optics of “low-energy” devices, would reduce associate damage to the neighbouring tissues.…”

“…This study found some differences in pupil area variation between FLACS and CP along surgical time (timepoints), although not statistically significant. Reports of a significant higher pupil area with FLACS immediately after suction, 19 were not apparent in our study. In those studies, anti-inflammatory eye drops were placed preoperatively on the eye population.…”

“… 16 , 17 Oppositely to the aforementioned “mainstream” reports, the few studies regarding pupillary changes with low energy pulse femtosecond lasers, show increasing evidence of minimal to absent narrowing of pupil size. 18 , 19 This difference in behaviour may be related to the laser spots diameter and energy level, with smaller values achieved by “low-energy” devices, thus reducing an associate damage to the neighbour tissues. This fact is prone to reduce prostaglandins levels and, consequently, no significant intraoperative pupil narrowing.…”