BACKGROUND To compare the visual and refractive outcomes of femtosecond laser assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) using Victus platform (Technolas Bausch and Lomb (B&L), Munich, Germany) and conventional phacoemulsification cataract surgery (CPCS). METHODS A retrospective study of 100 eyes operated for cataract. FLACS was performed in 50 eyes and CPCS was done in another 50 eyes. Preoperative and 6 months postoperative visual and refractive evaluation (efficacy, safety, predictability, and surgically induced astigmatism) as well as higher-order aberrations were analyzed. Efficacy index which equals post-operative mean of uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) divided by preoperative mean corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was calculated in both groups. Safety index equals post-operative mean of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) divided by preoperative mean CDVA. RESULTS Logarithm of the Minimum Angle of Resolution (LogMAR), UDVA improved in both groups after surgery (p < 0.05). It was 0.23 ± 0.20 and 0.291 ± 0.311 log MAR in FLACS and CPCS groups respectively. Safety index was 1.777 in FLACS group and 1.744 in CPCS groups showing high degree of safety of both measures. Mean surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) was 0.35 ± 0.67 D and 0.901 ± 0.882 D in FLACS and CPCS groups respectively (p = 0.015). The post-operative comparison between both groups was in favor of CPCS group vs. FLACS group regarding total aberrations (0.563 ± 0.386 vs. 0.91 ± 1.20) (p = 0.03), while low order aberrations were significantly less in FLACS group vs. CPCS group (0.64 + 0.63 vs. 2.07 + 3.15) (p = 0.027). RMS high order aberration was higher in FLACS group vs. CPCS group but of no statistical significance 0.54 ± 0.96 vs. 0.328 ± 0.360 (p = 0.082). CONCLUSION Femtosecond laser -assisted cataract surgery was a safe and precise procedure but enhanced visual outcomes only minimally when compared to conventional cataract surgery in experienced hands. Both FLACS and manual surgeries can achieve a high efficacy, predictability and safety with slight superior outcomes in FLACS. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER PACTR201804003256258 (date: 27 Mar 2018) Available at: https://pactr.samrc.ac.za/.

中文翻译：

---

飞秒激光辅助白内障手术和标准超声乳化术的屈光结果比较。

背景技术为了比较使用Victus平台（Technolas Bausch and Lomb（B＆L），德国慕尼黑）和常规超声乳化白内障手术（CPCS）的飞秒激光辅助白内障手术（FLACS）的视觉和屈光结局。方法回顾性研究100眼白内障手术的眼睛。FLACS行50眼，CPCS行另外50眼。对术前和术后6个月的视觉和屈光评估（疗效，安全性，可预测性和手术引起的散光）以及高阶像差进行了分析。两组均计算出等于未矫正远视力（UDVA）的术后平均值除以术前矫正远视力（CDVA）的功效指数。安全指数等于矫正远视力（CDVA）的手术后平均值除以术前平均CDVA。结果两组术后的最小分辨角对数（LogMAR），UDVA均得到改善（p <0.05）。FLACS和CPCS组分别为0.23±0.20和0.291±0.311 log MAR。FLACS组的安全指数为1.777，CPCS组的安全指数为1.744，表明这两种措施的安全性都很高。FLACS和CPCS组的平均手术诱发散光（SIA）分别为0.35±0.67 D和0.901±0.882 D（p = 0.015）。两组术后总像差比较有利于CPCS组与FLACS组（0.563±0.386 vs.0.91±1.20）（p = 0.03），而FLACS组与CPCS的低阶像差明显较少组（0.64 + 0.63 vs.2.07 + 3.15）（p = 0.027）。与ACSS组相比，FLACS组的RMS高阶像差更高，但无统计学意义，即0.54±0.96 vs. 0.328±0.360（p = 0.082）。结论飞秒激光辅助性白内障手术是一种安全，精确的手术方法，但与有经验的手进行常规白内障手术相比，其视觉效果只有极少的提高。FLACS和手动手术均可在FLACS中达到较高的疗效，可预测性和安全性，且效果稍好。试用注册号PACTR201804003256258（日期：2018年3月27日），网址为：https：//pactr.samrc.ac.za/。结论飞秒激光辅助性白内障手术是一种安全，精确的手术方法，但与有经验的手进行常规白内障手术相比，其视觉效果只有极少的提高。FLACS和手动手术均可在FLACS中达到较高的疗效，可预测性和安全性，且效果稍好。试用注册号PACTR201804003256258（日期：2018年3月27日），网址为：https：//pactr.samrc.ac.za/。结论飞秒激光辅助性白内障手术是一种安全，精确的手术方法，但与有经验的手进行常规白内障手术相比，其视觉效果只有极少的提高。FLACS和手动手术均可在FLACS中达到较高的疗效，可预测性和安全性，且效果稍好。试用注册号PACTR201804003256258（日期：2018年3月27日），网址为：https：//pactr.samrc.ac.za/。