Sameen Afzal Junejo, Shafi Muhammad Jatoi, Nisar Ahmed Khan


Background: The important factor for improving the cataract surgery is reduction in size of corneal
incision. Small incision results in less induced astigmatism, and faster visual rehabilitation. Methods: An
analysis of 100 eyes of 80 patients operated for phacoemulsification through micro incision by standard
chop technique (50 eyes) in group-I, and chick feed technique (50 eyes) in group-II is presented. All of the
patients were operated on by posterior limbal corneal incision under topical or sub-tenon anesthesia. In all
patients, posterior chamber bag fixation foldable intraocular lens implantation was performed through 1.4
to 1.6 mm corneal incision. Results: Forty patients (80%) out of fifty operated in group-2 had an over all
visual recovery of 6/12 to 6/9 on day one post operative, as compared to group-1 where only ten (20%)
patients out of fifty had visual recovery of 6/12 to 6/9. In the second week, out of 37 patients operated in
group-2, thirty patients (81%) had visual acuity 6/6. Similarly in second week post operative, out of forty
three patients operated in group-1, only eighteen patients (41.8%) had V/A of 6/6. Maximum visual
recovery was observed in early post operative phase in group-2 patients. Conclusion: The chick feed
technique has been proved to be the most compromising method in micro incision cataract surgery, as
compared to standard chop method, due to its capability of working on low energy and negligible vacuum.
Keywords: Cataract; Phaco MICS; Chick Feed Technique; Standard Chop Technique


Kelman CD. Phaco-emulsification and aspiration. A new

technique of cataract removal. A preliminary report. Am J

Ophthalmol 1967;64:23–35.

Girard LJ. Ultrasonic fragmentation for cataract extraction and

cataract complications. Adv Ophthalmol 1978;37:127–35.

Girard LJ. Pars plana Lensectomy by ultrasonic fragmentation:

-Part II: Operative and Post operative complications

avoidance or management. Ophthalmic Surg 1984;15:217–20.

Shearing SP, Relyea RL, Loaiza A, Shearing RL. Routine

Phacoemulsification through a 1 mm non-sutured incision.

Cataract 1985;2:6–10.

Agarwal A, Agarwal S, Narang P, Narang S. Phaco NIT.

Phacoemulsification through a 0.9 mm corneal incision. J

Cataract Refract Surg 2001;27:1548–52.

Pandey SK, Werner L, Agarwal A, Agarwal A, Lal V, Patel

N, et al. Phaconit. Cataract removal through a sub 1 mm

Incision and implantation of the ThinOptX rollable intraocular

lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002;28:1710–3.

Agarwal A, Agarwal S, Agarwal A. Phaconit with an Acrytech

IOL . J Cataract Refract Surg 2003;29:854–5.

Tsuneoka H, Shiba T, Takahashi Y.Feasibility of ultrasound

cataract surgery with a 1.4 mm incision . J Cataract Refract

Surg 2001;27:934–40.

Randall Olson: “Microphaco chop” In: David Changs textbook

on “Phaco Chop;” USA: Slack; 2004. p.227–37.

David Chang: “Bimanual phaco chop” In David Changs

textbook on “Phaco Chop;” USA: Slack; 2004. p.239–50.

Tsuneoka H, Hayama A, Takahama M. Ultra small incision bimanual Phacoemulsification and Acrysof SA30AL

implantation through a 2.2 mm incision. J Cataract Refract

Surg 2003;29:1070–6.

Alio JL. What does MICS require. In: Alio’s textbook MICS.

Highlights Ophthalmol. 2004;1–4.

Demong TT, Yoshida K. Evaluation of Soft Foldable IOLs in

relation to PMMA Lenses. Ophthalmic Practice. 1996;2:61–4.

Khan AA, Azher AN, Chohan AM. Review of 100 Cases of

Phacoemulsification. Pak J Ophthalmol 1997;13:37–40.

Olson R. Viscoelastic to the rescue. In: Obstbaum SA,

moderator. Advances in cataract surgery: devices, applications,

techniques. Ophthalmol Times 2004;29(Suppl-3):12–3.

Brauweiler P. Bimanual irrigation/aspiration. J Cataract Refract

Surg 1996;22:1013–6.

Pirazzoli G, D’Eliseo D, Ziosi M, Acciarri R. Effects of

phacoemulsification time on the corneal endothelium using

phacofracture and phaco chop techniques. J Cataract Refract

Surg 1996;22:967–9.

Hayashi K, Nakao F, Hayashi F. Corneal endothelial cell loss

after phacoemulsification using nuclear cracking procedures. J

Cataract Refract Surg 1994;20:44–7.

Tsuneoka H, Shiba T, Takahashi Y. Ultrasonic

Phacoemulsification using a 1.4 mm incision: Clinical Results.

J Cataract Refract Surg 2002;28:81–6.

Brown DC. Point/counterpoint: Which technique do you prefer

for phaco? Cataract Refract Surg Today 2001;2:18–20.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Contact Number: +92-992-382571

email: [jamc] [@] []