Comparison of the Effect of Sodium Hyaluronate (Ophthalin^®) and Hydroxypropylmethylcellulose (HPMC-Ophtal^®) on Corneal Endothelium, Central Corneal Thickness, and Intraocular Pressure after Phacoemulsification

Abstract

2% Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose, compared with sodium hyaluronate 1%, is superior in protecting the corneal endothelial cells, has the same effect on central corneal thickness, and is associated with slightly higher intraocular pressure 1 day post operatively. It compares favorably with sodium hyaluronate 1% and can be used as an effective and cheaper alternative in routine small incision cataract surgery with implant.

The protective effect of ophthalmic viscoelastic devices on endothelial cell loss during cataract surgery: a meta-analysis using mixed treatment comparisons

“…The two studies that included patients with hard nucleus cataracts showed higher mean loss in endothelial cell density of 300–400 cells/mm 2 30 39. Only four studies reported a significant difference between one or more OVDs, with conflicting results in two cases 38 33…”

The Use of Ophthalmic Viscosurgical Devices During Donor's Corneal Harvesting

“…The degree of cell loss was least in the Vitrax group, which suggested its superior effect on the corneal endothelium. Ray-Chaudhuri et al 8 also compared the effect on the corneal ECD between hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC-Ophtal) and sodium hyaluronate (Ophthalin), and found that the eyes in which HPMC-Ophtal was used had significantly lower decrease in ECD.…”

Peculiarities of reparation of the outflow tracts in sinusotrabeculotomy with the application of visco-elastic according to the data of light and electron microscopy

“… íàñòîÿùåå âðåìÿ âèñêîýëàñòèêè øèðîêî èñïîëüçóþòñÿ ïðè õèðóðãèè êàòàðàêòû è ðàçëè÷íûõ ðåêîíñòðóêòèâíûõ îïåðàöèÿõ íà ïåðåäíåì îòäåëå ãëàçà äëÿ çàùèòû òêàíåé ãëàçà îò ìåõàíè÷åñêèõ ïîâðåaeäåíèé, â êà÷åñòâå âÿçêèõ «õèðóðãè÷åñêèõ» èíñòðóìåíòîâ äëÿ ìåõàíè÷åñêîãî ñìåùåíèÿ è óäåðaeàíèÿ âíóòðèãëàçíûõ ñòðóêòóð, ñîçäàíèÿ îáúåìíûõ ïðîñòðàíñòâ, íåîáõîäèìûõ äëÿ ñâîáîäíîãî ìàíèïóëèðîâàíèÿ â êàìåðàõ ãëàçà â õîäå õèðóðãè÷åñêîãî âìåøàòåëüñòâà è äð. [2, 22,23,29,30]. Stegmann R. â 1999 ãîäó áûë ïåðâûì, êòî êëèíè-÷åñêè èñïîëüçîâàë âèñêîýëàñòèê â õèðóðãèè ãëàóêîìû, ðàçðàáîòàâ îïåðàöèþ âèñêîêàíàëîñòîìèþ, êîòîðàÿ áûëà íàïðàâëåíà íà àêòèâàöèþ ïåðåäíåãî ïóòè îòòîêà âíóòðèãëàçíîé aeèäêîñòè ÷åðåç ðàñøèðåííûé ïðîñâåò øëåììîâà êàíàëà ê âåíîçíûì êîëëåêòîðàì è ê ñîñóäàì ýïèñêëåðû, ÷òî äîñòèãàëîñü ïóò¸ì ââåäåíèÿ âèñêîýëàñòèêà â øëåììîâ êàíàë, ïîääåðaeèâàÿ åãî îáú¸ì è ïðåäîõðàíÿÿ ñòåíêè îò ñîïðèêîñíîâåíèÿ ìåaeäó ñîáîé [32,33].…”