| |
|
|
Figure 1: In the Soft Shell technique a dispersive OVD is injected first to form
a mound on the surface of the anterior capsule of the lens (violet).
Next the Viscous-cohesive OVD is injected below the dispersive
OVD onto the capsular surface at the centre of the dispersive
mound, thus forcing the dispersive upwards and outwards, into
a smoth layer lining the endothelial surface of the cornea.

Figure 2: In the Ultimate Soft Shell technique, first the viscoadaptives
OVD is injected to fill the anterior chamber about 80% (yellow).
Then balanced salt solutuon is injected remoted from the incision
onto the anterior surface of the lens, forcefully. The force
causes the viscoadaptives OVD to move upwards and backwards,
toward the incision, thus blocking it, preventing exit of the
balanced salt solution. Thus the eye is pressurized as if it
was totally full of viscoadaptives, but the lens surface os covered
only with balanced salt solution, offering the resistance of
only water to the performance of the capsulorhexis.

Figure 3: The current classification of OVDs is a two dimensional
table with log of zero shear viscosity decreasing downwards on
the Y axis and Cohesion decreasing to the right on the X axis.
Pseudodispersive viscoadaptives uniquely both the cohesive and
dispersive columns as their behavior changes from highly viscous
cohesive to pseudodispersive with increasing fluid turbulence.
Red rectangles identify rheologic behavior positions for which
there are currently no OVDs.


Figure 4: A. DisCoVisc was made by modification fro the Viscoat
formula. The chondroitin sulfate moiety remains unchanged, while
the hyaluronic acid moiety was removed and replaced with a lower
concentration of higher molecular weight hyaluronic acid.
B. DisCoVisc (red pseudoplasticity curve) is seen to be almost
identical in behavior to Healon (blue) at low shear rates (left
of graph), but becomes more similar to Viscoat (green) at high
shear, reflecting its dispersive nature.
OVDs (viscoelastics) are substances that exhibit both viscous
and elastic properties, and are most commonly used in cataract surgery,
but also in other ophthalmic intraocular surgical procedures and as components
of artificial tears and rewetting drops.
Since not all of the lower viscosity products are particularly elastic, and
since some of the devices are elastoviscous rather than viscoelastic, the
International Standards Organization (ISO) coined the term ophthalmic viscosurgical
devices (OVD), harmonizing it with other device nomenclature in medicine
and surgery.1 Healon (Sodium Hyaluronate 1%, Abbott Medical Optics, AMO,
Santa Ana, Calif.) was the first viscoelastic agent developed, and brought
a revolution to the way traditional cataract surgery was performed.
OVDs provide essential protection of the corneal endothelium, and create
and maintain working space during cataract and other intraocular surgery.
With the advent of phacoemulsification the need for OVDs possessing different
physical properties for different surgical phases became apparent, leading
to the development of the “Soft Shell technique.”2 Choosing the
most effective OVD for a particular use is based on a thorough understanding
of the properties and functions of the various products, and the physical
nature of what the surgeon is trying to achieve.
Pursuit of perfection
The use of viscoelastics for anterior segment surgery was introduced by Balazs
in 1979 with Healon.3 Healon was the first viscoelastic substance introduced
commercially (1980) for use in human intraocular surgery. Previously, air,
balanced salt solution, and the patient’s plasma were used in cataract
surgery to maintain space and to attempt to minimize contact of surgical
instruments and the IOL with the corneal endothelium during intraocular lens
implantation.4
Unfortunately, these substances lack sufficient viscosity and elasticity
to prevent their escaping from large surgical wounds, often resulting in
collapse of the anterior chamber at inopportune times.
Home-made hydroxypropylmethylcellulose 1% (HPMC), sourced from wood pulp,
was then trialed as an OVD and for lubricating the implant during intraocular
surgery.5 HPMC often contained impurities, possesses the lowest viscosity
of all OVDs, is poorly elastic, and minimally pseudoplastic. Poor pseudoplasticity
(lack of decline in viscosity with increasing shear rate) causes it to require
a large-bore cannula and increased infusion pressure for injection, thereby
causing decreased feedback sensation for the surgeon.6
In pursuit of an ideal OVD, various viscoelastic agents have been manufactured
by modifying the rheologic components, their molecular weights, concentrations
and mixtures, and thereby, their biomechanical properties. An ideal OVD should
be biocompatible with ocular tissues, should be able to create and maintain
space during intraocular surgical manipulation and should protect the corneal
endothelium. It should also be able to be easily removed from the anterior
chamber at the end of surgery, and should have little effect on post operative
intraocular pressure (IOP) rise.7
It follows directly from the fact that the rheologic properties of an OVD
are the result not only of its rheologic polymer(s), but also of the molecular
weight(s) of those polymers and their concentrations, included buffers, etc.
that OVDs cannot be adequately referred to generically by their chief rheologic
polymer and its concentration, but must be referred to by their trade names
for full characterization of their makeup and surgical behavior, as for example,
many companies may manufacture a 1% sodium hyaluronate product, but they
are all different in their rheologic properties.
Rheological properties such as elasticity, viscosity, pseudoplasticity and
cohesion determine the performance of an OVD in surgery. Elasticity is the
property of a substance to return to its original shape after being stretched,
compressed or deformed.6
Viscous fluids possess internal friction caused by molecular attractions
resisting flow; viscosity is the measure of this resistance to flow. Viscosity
of a viscoelastic substance at rest is called zero shear viscosity, which
is the only consistent measure of viscosity in a pseudoplastic fluid. Zero
shear viscosity of an OVD is a function of its rheologic polymer, its molecular
weight and concentration.
Pseudoplastic fluids demonstrate a decline in viscosity with increasing shear
rate, and at very high shear rates, the viscosities of pseudoplastic fluids
may dramatically decrease and become independent of the molecular weight,
and determined mainly by concentration.8 Viscoelasticity provides ocular
protection against high frequency mechanical insults associated with phacoemulsification,
Pseudoplasticity is a property of non-Newtonian fluids, such as sodium hyaluronate.
Some highly pseudoplastic fluids can be easily extruded through a thin cannula
despite very high zero shear viscosities. Chondroitin sulfate, like air and
water, is a newtonian substance, as it doesn’t change its viscosity
at different rates of shear.6
Pseudoplastic behavior of OVDs is often confused with surgical retention.
Research has demonstrated that retention of an OVD within the anterior chamber
during phaco is enhanced by three factors: greater dispersive properties,
negative charge, and the presence of hyaluronic acid in the OVD, for which
Madsen (1989)9 had earlier found specific endothelial binding sites. Of all
OVDs marketed only Viscoat (Alcon, Fort Worth, Texas) and DisCoVisc (Alcon)
score well on all three counts, as they possess hyaluronic acid, and the
chondroitin sulfate component makes them more dispersive and enhances their
negative surface charges.
Free radical formation has been related to ophthalmic phacoemulsification
devices. OVDs reduce the oxidative damage caused by free radicals produced
during phacoemulsification surgery.10 Both hyaluronic acid and chondroitin
sulfate are known free radical scavengers. The antioxidant effect of the
OVD depends on its molecular makeup and its retention in the anterior chamber
during phacoemulsification; the more dispersive the agent the more retention
is seen during and after phacoemulsification and irrigation-aspiration of
cortex.11-12
Classifying the current market
Initially, OVDs were classified into two kinds: higher viscosity cohesive
and lower viscosity dispersive.13 Cohesion is the degree to which long-chain
polymeric molecules entangle and is a function of the nature of the molecule
and its chain length. Cohesive HA OVDs are high molecular weight (greater
than 1 million Daltons) and possess high zero shear viscosity. Higher viscosity
cohesive OVDs are best at creating and preserving space and inducing pressure
in the eye.
A major advantage of higher viscosity cohesive OVDs is their ability to induce
and sustain pressure in an eye despite an incision, enabling pressure-equalized
cataract surgery. This is important in performing consistent capsulorhexes,
preventing the tear from running outwards, as it would when the pressure
behind the anteriorly convex anterior capsule exceeds that in front of it,
and to implant IOLs in stabilized open capsular bags.
They are also easily removed from the eye as a bolus during irrigation and
aspiration especially in the presence of a large incision. Currently available
viscous-cohesive OVDs include Healon (1% sodium hyaluronate, 4 million Daltons),
Provisc (1% sodium hyaluronate, 2.4 million Daltons), Amvisc Plus (1.6% sodium
hyaluronate, 1.5 million Daltons, Bausch and Lomb, B&L, Rochester, N.Y.),
Amvisc (1.2% sodium hyaluronate, 2 million Daltons, B&L), and many others.
Healon GV is a super viscous cohesive OVD (1.4% sodium hyaluronate, 5 million
Daltons) with a zero shear viscosity of 2,000,000 milli Pascal seconds (mPaS),
about 10 times the zero-shear viscosity of regular viscous cohesive OVDs,
which results in it being able to perform all of the tasks above of a viscous-cohesive
OVD better.
While any OVD, if retained in the anterior chamber after surgery, can result
in increased postoperative IOP, very high IOP spikes can occur if a large
amount of a highly viscous cohesive OVD is left in the eye.14 When appropriately
removed, post-op IOP spikes are similar with different OVDs.15
Lower viscosity dispersive OVDs are lower molecular weight and have low zero
shear viscosity (less than 100,000 mPaS). The advantage of these OVDs is
that they are retained better in anterior chamber during high level of fluid
turbulence such as during phacoemulsification. They are capable of partitioning
spaces such that there is a viscoelastic occupied space and a working space
with circulating balanced salt solution, which makes lower viscosity dispersive
OVDs particularly useful in managing complications.16 When aspirated, lower
viscosity dispersive OVDs, even under low vacuum, lack internal cohesion
and break apart, thus they are vacuumed out in smaller pieces, leaving most
of the OVD mass behind and thus provide added endothelial protection in prolonged
or difficult phaco cases.17
It follows that it takes longer to completely remove dispersive OVDs from
the eye at the completion of surgery, when compared to cohesive OVDs, resulting
in small amounts of dispersive OVDs usually being left behind at the end
of surgery, causing small IOP spikes, whereas with highly viscous cohesive
OVDs, either a larger amount of OVD is left, or almost none.
Currently available dispersive OVDs in the United States include Viscoat
(sodium hyaluronate 3%, 600,000 Daltons & chondroitin sulfate 4%, 50,000
Daltons), Ocucoat, (HPMC 2%, 80,000 Daltons, B&L) and Cellugel (Modified
HPMC 2%, 300,000 Daltons, Alcon), among many others.
Healon5 (AMO), which is 2.3% sodium hyaluronate, is a viscoadaptive OVD with
a molecular weight of 4 million Daltons (it is made up of the same hyaluronic
acid chains as Healon, but differs in concentration). Viscoadaptive OVDs
are different from the traditional dispersive and cohesive OVDs in that they
are extremely highly viscous and cohesive under low shear conditions; at
low flow phacoemulsification, they do not fracture and remain undisturbed
while phacoemulsification continues. By design, they also exhibit pseudodispersive
characteristics under high shear conditions, because they begin to fracture
under stress, much as a solid would. They may therefore be referred to as
pseudodispersive.16,17 Like other OVDs, complete removal of viscoadaptives
is essential to reduce the risk of high post operative IOP.18 In the late
1990s, a systematic OVD method of usage scheme—the ultimate soft shell
technique—was proposed19 with the use of viscoadaptive OVDs (Figures
1 and 3). It was an extension of the previous soft shell technique, but the
extremely high zero shear viscosity of viscoadaptives enabled the soft shell
to be performed with a viscoadaptive and balanced salt solution—the
ultimate low zero shear viscosity OVD, with essentially the same viscosity
as water.
OVD classification has recently been modified to accommodate DisCoVisc (Alcon),
the first viscous dispersive OVD.20 (Figure 3) DisCoVisc is a combination
of hyaluronic acid 1.6% and chondroitin sulfate 4%, and is a higher viscosity
dispersive OVD (1.7 million Daltons). DisCoVisc possesses zero shear viscosity
similar to Provisc, but is dispersive, similar to Viscoat. DisCoVisc combines
the advantage of both a cohesive and a dispersive OVD. It provides dual function;
space maintenance (cohesive) and superior retention (dispersive) in the same
syringe (Figure 4).
In one study,21 DisCoVisc showed greater retention under experimental conditions
compared to other OVDs. It is useful in most circumstances, though it is
not possible to duplicate the scope of uses that can be achieved with two,
or more, different fluids in the soft shell or ultimate soft shell, or variations
of these techniques, with any single OVD.
Optimizing surgical outcomes
In order to maintain space and protect tissues, the OVD should possess high
viscosity at low shear rates; but low viscosity at high shear rates is also
important to permit passage through a small bore cannula. For phacoemulsification
and I/A, some OVD should be retained throughout the procedure in the anterior
chamber, protecting the endothelium; and for IOL implantation and movement
of instruments, the OVD should possess moderate viscosity at medium shear
rate.
It is hard to meet all the above requirements by a single OVD, and different
newer OVDs (Healon5—viscoadaptive & pseudodispersive, DisCoVisc—higher
viscosity dispersive), and OVD techniques (soft shell, ultimate soft shell)
have been designed to try to achieve these apparently contrary and mutually
exclusive goals. Consequently, some surgeons prefer using different OVDs
during different phases of phacoemulsification surgery.
To cater to this need, several OVDs come packaged in pairs. DuoVisc is an
OVD system containing Viscoat and ProVisc. Similarly, Healon D+H and Healon
D+GV both provide the surgeon with a two OVD system.
In contrast, surgeons who prefer to use only one OVD during surgery may find
the newer DisCoVisc, or Healon5 particularly effective. Depending on individual
style—for example, a tendency towards more rigorous I/A versus a gentler,
slower approach—a more dispersive or a more viscous OVD may be preferred.
Some surgeons prefer the higher zero shear viscosity of Healon5 and use of
the ultimate soft shell technique. In all of these techniques, the common
goal of devising a method to enhance OVD retention during the turbulent phases
of surgery, and a second method to enable easy removal of all the OVD at
the termination of surgery prevails.
OVDs are essential tools in cataract surgery. The choice of best OVD is based
on personal surgical technique as well as individual surgical case physical
requirements. With the availability of so many OVDs possessing diverse rheological
properties that influence their surgical behavior, it is tough to make a
selection. Detailed knowledge of OVDs and their biomechanical properties
is important in order to make the right choice. This review has only considered
the most common OVDs available in north America. Still others, usually similar,
are available in Europe and other parts of the world.
References
1. Arshinoff S. New terminology: Ophthalmic viscosurgical devices. J
Cataract Refract Surg. 2000; 26:627-8.
2. Arshinoff SA . Dispersive-cohesive viscoelastic soft shell technique.
J Cataract Refract Surg. 1999 Feb;25(2):167-73.
3. Balazs EA, inventor; Biotrics, Inc, assignee. Ultrapurhyaluronic acid
and the use there of. US patent 4141973. February 27, 1979.
4. Aquavella JV, Shaw EL. A technique for treating positive vitreous
pressure during intraocular lens implantation in intracapsular surgery.
Ophthalmic Surg. 1977; 8(4):78-80.
5. Fechner PU. Methylcellulose in lens implantation. J Am Intraocul Soc.1977;
3:180-1.
6. Arshinoff SA: Viscoelastic substances: Their properties and use when
placing an IOL in the capsular bag. Current Cdn. Ophthal. Pract. 1986;
4: 2, 64-5,72,74
7. Liesegang TJ: Viscoelastic substances in ophthalmology. Survey Ophthalmol
1990; 34: 268-93.
8. Bothner H, Wik O. Rheology of hyaluronate. Acta Otolaryngol (Stokh).
1987; 442 (suppl): 25-30.
9. Madsen K, Stenevi U, Apple DJ, Harfstrand A. Histochemical and receptor
binding studies of hyaluronic acid and hyaluronic acid binding sites
on corneal endothelium. Ophthalmic Pract. 1989; 7:92-7.
10. Augustin AJ, Dick HB. Oxidative tissue damage after phacoemulsification:
Influence of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices. J Cataract Refract Surg.
2004; 30:424-
11. Takahashi H, Sakamoto A, Takahashi R et al. Free radicals in phacoemulsification
and aspiration procedures. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002; 120:1348-52.
12. Vasavada A. Presentation at the Asian-Pacific Academy of Cataract
and Refractive Surgeons. Bangkok, Thailand. November 27-30, 2008.
13. Arshinoff SA. Dispersive and cohesive viscoelastic materials in phacoemulsification.
Ophthalmic Practice 1995; 13:98-104.
14. Kohnen T, von Ehr M, Scutte E, Koch DD. Evaluation of intraocular
pressure with Healon and Healon GV in sutureless cataract surgery with
foldable lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1996;22(2):227-37.
15. Arshinoff SA, Albiani DA, Taylor-Laporte J. Intraocular pressure
after bilateral cataract surgery using Healon, Healon5, and Healon GV.
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002 Apr; 28(4):617-25.
16. Arshinoff Steve A. Why Healon5. The meaning of viscoadaptive. Ophthalmic
Practice 1999: 17: 6;332-334.
17. Arshinoff SA, Wong E. Understanding, retaining, and removing dispersive
and pseudo-dispersive OVDs. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003: 29:12; 2318-2323.
18. Zetterstrom C, Wejde G, Taube M. Healon 5: Comparison of 2 removal
techniques. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002; 28:1561-1564.
19. Arshinoff SA. Using BSS with viscoadaptives in the ultimate soft
shell technique. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002, 28:1509-14.
20. Arshinoff SA, Jafari M. New classification of ophthalmic viscosurgical
devices—2005. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005; 31(11):2167-71.
21. Petroll WM, Jafari M, Lane SS et al. Quantitative assessment of ophthalmic
viscosurgical device retention using in vivo confocal microscopy. J Cataract
Refract Surg. 2005;31(12):2363-8.
22. Rainer G, Stifter E, Luksch A, Menapace R. Comparison of the effect
of Viscoat and Duovisc on postoperative intraocular pressure after small-incision
cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008; 34: 253-7.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Dr. Arshinoff is in private ophthalmic group practice in Toronto and holds
academic appointments at the University of Toronto (Toronto), and McMaster
University (Hamilton). He specializes in cataract and refractive surgery,
and currently consults with Alcon (Fort Worth, Texas) and Zeiss (Dublin,
Calif.). Dr. Gulati is a senior research associate at Ora (Andover, Mass.),
which receives grant/research support from various ophthalmic pharmaceutical
companies, including Alcon.
|