Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Dog cataract surgery: comparing prechop and stop-chop methods
By Huo, Jiaqi et al.·Published in Veterinary ophthalmology·2026·Department of Clinical Veterinary Medicine, China·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Comparison of Modified Prechop Technique With a Novel Prechopper With Stop-Chop Technique in 225 Eyes of 149 Dogs With Hard Cataracts Regarding CDE and Postoperative Complications.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 149 dogs with hard cataracts underwent surgery to remove the cloudy lenses using two different techniques: prechop and stop-chop. The prechop method used less energy during the procedure and resulted in fewer complications afterward, such as swelling and flare in the eye. Both techniques had similar success rates in retaining vision after surgery, but the prechop technique had a lower incidence of glaucoma. Overall, the prechop technique proved to be a safer and more effective option for treating cataracts in dogs.
People also search for: dog cataract surgery options · prechop vs stop-chop cataract treatment · dog eye surgery complications
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare cumulative dissipated energy (CDE) and postoperative complications between modified prechop and stop-chop techniques in dogs with hard cataracts. ANIMALS STUDIED: Seventy-nine dogs with 123 mature cataract eyes were studied for measuring anteroposterior lens diameters, or 149 dogs with 225 hard cataract eyes were treated with prechop phacoemulsification or stop-chop phacoemulsification surgery. PROCEDURES: A species-specific prechopper (3.5-5.0 mm width) was designed based on canine anteroposterior lens diameter (APLD: 7.40 ± 0.99 mm) and anterior chamber depth (ACD: 2.54 ± 0.75 mm). Among 225 eyes (149 dogs), 110 eyes were randomly selected for prechop phacoemulsification with the specific prechopper, and 115 eyes for stop-chop phacoemulsification. Surgical outcomes, including CDE, postoperative aqueous flare and complications, were evaluated. RESULTS: The prechop group demonstrated less mean CDE and postoperative aqueous flare incidence compared to the stop-chop group (53.93 ± 15.29 vs. 78.32 ± 21.32, p < 0.001; 35.14% vs. 58.59%, respectively). The prechop group had fewer overall complications than the stop-chop group (35.2% vs. 56.7%). Vision retention rates at final follow-up (30-1440 days postoperation) were comparable (prechop: 95.7% vs. stop-chop: 92.9%), but glaucoma incidence was lower in the prechop group than in the stop-chop cohort (5 vs. 3 eyes). CDE correlated strongly with complication severity. CONCLUSIONS: The prechop technique with a novel prechopper offers a safer, more efficient alternative for phacoemulsification of canine cataracts, particularly in eyes requiring high energy nuclear fragmentation.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41204695/