Comparative Clinical Study of Surgical Performance of Quatera 700 versus Centurion and Signature Pro
Sri Ganesh1, Sheetal Brar1, Supriya Sriganesh1
1Department of Phaco-Refractive Surgery, Nethradhama Super Speciality Eye Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
Purpose:
To compare the intra-operative surgical performance of Quatera 700 with Centurion and Signature Pro phacoemulsification systems.
Setting:
Nethradhama Superspeciality Eye Hospital, Bangalore, India.
Study Design:
Prospective, interventional, 3-arm, randomized comparison study.
Methods:
A total of 180 non-consecutive eyes satisfying the eligibility criteria were recruited. N = 60 eyes were operated using each of the above systems, of which n = 30 eyes had LOCS III grade 1-2, and n = 30 eyes had grade 3-4 nuclear density. Phacoemulsification with foldable IOL implantation was performed by a single experienced surgeon. Chamber stability scores (1-4, 4 being the worst), fluid turnover per case, surge incidence and intra-operative complications were assessed.
Results:
Intra-operatively, the mean chamber stability score was significantly better for the Quatera 700 in both the soft and dense cataract groups compared to the other two machines (p < 0.001). Total Phaco Time (TPT) with Quatera 700 was significantly lower compared to Signature Pro, while it was comparable with Centurion for both the soft and dense cataract groups. The mean fluid turnover was significantly lower for the Quatera 700 in the dense cataract group (p = 0.04) and so was the combined phaco and I/A time (p = 0.01) when compared with Signature Pro. One eye operated with Signature Pro and 2 eyes operated with Centurion had PCR due to surge. The mean corneal clarity scores on POD-1 and specular counts at 2 weeks and 6 months were comparable.
Conclusion:
The new Quatera 700 system resulted in lesser TPT, fluid turnover and phaco + I/A time than Signature Pro, while its performance was comparable to Centurion for these parameters. Moreover, the surgeon graded intra-operative chamber stability scoring was highest, when compared to the other two systems.
Ctri Registration Number:
CTRI/2022/01/039296.
