Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 2263
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page

   Table of Contents      
LETTER TO EDITOR
Year : 2010  |  Volume : 58  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 168-169

Is balanced salt solution really superior to ringer lactate for phacoemulsification?


H.V. Desai Eye Hospital, Pune, India

Date of Web Publication26-Feb-2010

Correspondence Address:
Parikshit Gogate
Department of Community Ophthalmology, H.V. Desai Eye Hospital, Sr. No. 93 Travade Vasti, Mohammadwadi, Hadapsar, Pune - 411 028
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0301-4738.60073

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Gogate P, Deshpande M. Is balanced salt solution really superior to ringer lactate for phacoemulsification?. Indian J Ophthalmol 2010;58:168-9

How to cite this URL:
Gogate P, Deshpande M. Is balanced salt solution really superior to ringer lactate for phacoemulsification?. Indian J Ophthalmol [serial online] 2010 [cited 2020 Jul 6];58:168-9. Available from: http://www.ijo.in/text.asp?2010/58/2/168/60073

Dear Editor,

The article by Vasavada et al. on the comparison of the use of Ringer's lactate (RL) and a balanced salt solution (BSS) on the postoperative outcomes of phacoemulsification, by a randomized control trial, has added in vivo evidence about the superiority of BSS plus. [1]

But except for the first postoperative day, there was no significant difference between the use of two fluids for phacoemulsification. It would have been better if the authors had also showed the visual acuity results on the first postoperative day. We presume that there were no intraoperative complications. A difference of 25 mm of corneal swelling might have been "statistically" significant, but was it "clinically" significant in terms of suboptimal visual acuity? A one-week follow-up would also have helped. An Indian-made RL costs about Rs. 25 only (< $0.5) compared to Rs. 2800 ($62) for BSS plus. If we were to calculate a cost-benefit ratio, would a single-line visual acuity difference on the first postoperative day justify such an increased cost for most patients? Even Indian-made BSS are more than four times as costly as the RL. Also, the aqueous turnover time in the anterior chamber is less than 24 h. Hence the irrigating solution would not make any difference beyond the first few days.

BSS plus definitely would have incrementally helped in complicated cataracts, very hard cataracts, patients with poor endothelial cell counts, very old patients, and also where such high-viscosity devices were not available. The authors need to be congratulated for such less endothelial cell loss, [1] compared to other studies. [2],[3] This might be due to the operating surgeon's vast experience, selection of cataracts, and use of high-viscosity agents such as Provisc™ and Viscoat™.

In a country like ours, operating surgeons need to choose their consumables rationally, not just the best available, but rather optimally available. [4] It can be tailored for each cataract surgery. Ruit et al. had found no significant difference in corneal thickness and visual acuity, even on the first postoperative day, when comparing manual small incision cataract surgery and phacoemulcification. [3] A BSS is better, but it can only be called "statistically," not "clinically" superior to the RL, unless we have evidence to the contrary.


  Acknowledgment Top


The authors are thankful to Dr. Pranav More and Dr. Prachi Patil for their inputs.

 
  References Top

1.
Vasavada V, Vasavada V, Dixit NV, Raj SM, Vasavada AR. Comparison between Ringer's lactate and balanced salt solution on postoperative outcomes after phacoemulsification: A randomized clinical trial. Indian J Ophthalmol 2009;57:191-5.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
2.
Nayak BK, Jain EK. Comparison of corneal endothelial cell loss during phacoemulsification using continuous anterior chamber infusion versus those using ophthalmic viscosurgical device: Randomized controlled trial. Indian J Ophthalmol 2009;57:99-103.  Back to cited text no. 2
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
3.
Ruit S, Tabin G, Chang D, Bajracharya L, Kline DC, Richheimer R, et al. A prospective randomized clinical trial of phacoemulsification vs. manual sutureless small-incision extra capsular cataract surgery in Nepal. Am J Ophthalmol 2007;143:32-8.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Gogate PM, Deshpande M, Nirmalan PK. Why do phacoemulsification? Manual small incision cataract surgery is almost as effective but less expensive. Ophthalmology 2007;114:965-8.  Back to cited text no. 4
    




 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
Acknowledgment
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1601    
    Printed36    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded221    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal