Background The aim of this study was to compare the operation time and patient discomfort between a three‐dimensional heads‐up display system (HUDS) and a conventional ophthalmic surgical microscope (OSM) used in bilateral cataract surgery. Methods This retrospective study included 106 eyes from 53 patients who underwent immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery at a single tertiary referral center. HUDS and OSM were used alternately for each eye of the same patient. The total operation and procedure times were measured using video recordings. Complications, intraocular pressure, corneal edema, and pain‐related subjective discomfort were assessed using electronic medical records. Best‐corrected visual acuity and prediction error were evaluated 1 month after surgery. Results There were no significant differences in the cataract grade or biometric parameters between the groups. The HUDS and OSM groups showed comparable results in terms of the total operation time, procedure time, cumulative dissipated energy, and irrigation volume. Posterior capsule rupture occurred in one patient (1.89%) in the HUDS group. On the first postoperative day, there were no significant differences in intraocular pressure, corneal edema, or patient‐reported discomfort between the groups. Best‐corrected visual acuity and prediction error were also comparable at 1 month postoperatively. Conclusions In this bilateral comparison study, HUDS and OSM demonstrated similar efficacy and patient‐reported discomfort, with comparable early and 1‐month postoperative outcomes.
Kim et al. (Thu,) studied this question.