AIM: To compare the effect of application of auxiliary equipment protection onphacoemulsification and conventional phacoemulsification in treatment of hard nucleus cataract.

METHODS: Totally 87 cases(115 eyes)Ⅳ-Ⅴ nuclear cataract were randomly divided into two groups. Forty-four cases(58 eyes)were in group A. In this group, auxiliary equipment(Chop hook)protection was used in ultrasonic emulsification. During the surgery, there was a slightly pause after the nuclear fragmentation was sucked by the phaco tip. Then the auxiliary equipment was placed between the nuclear fragmentation and the cornea, that was just located above the blocked nuclear. After that, the nuclear fragmentation was removed through phacoemulsification. Forty-three cases(57 eyes)were in Group B, which was treated with traditional phacoemulsification. Visual acuity, corneal edema, the loss rate of corneal endothelial cell, intraoperative ultrasound emulsification time, intraoperative and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups at 1 day, 3 days and 1 month after operation.

RESULTS: One and 3 days after operation, the rate of vision recovery in group A was faster than that in group B(P <0.05). One month later, there was no statistical difference between the two groups in vision. At 3 days and 1 month after operation, the corneal endothelial cell loss rate between the two groups was significantly different(P <0.05). The complications of intraoperative and postoperative had no significant difference between the two groups(P >0.05).

CONCLUSION: Application of auxiliary equipment during the process of phacoemulsification is safer than conventional phacoemulsification.