Comparison of post-operative inflammation using irrigating solution with and without heparin in patients with traumatic cataract

<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong><br />The role of heparin in managing post-operative inflammation has been debated. Some studies suggest that heparin can reduce inflammation by inhibiting inflammatory mediators, while others argue that its anticoagulant properties could potentially worsen the inflammation. This study was designed to compare post-operative inflammation in patients undergoing traumatic cataract surgery with and without heparin added in the irrigating solution.<br /><strong>Methods: </strong><br />This quasi-experimental study was conducted in the Department of Ophthalmology at Lahore General Hospital Lahore from April 2023 to April 2024. A total of 48 patients with traumatic cataract were divided by consecutive sampling into two groups (24 in each).  Group A underwent surgery using heparin in the irrigating solution, while Group B had surgery without it. All patients were followed up on Day 1, Week 1, and after one month. Post-operative intraocular reaction was documented and compared. An Independent sample t-test was used to compare the numeric data. The Chi-square test and Fisher's exact test were used to compare post-operative Inflammation. <br /><strong>Results:</strong> <br />Mean age of the patients was 12.29±8.33 years. On day 1, the Group-A showed fewer Grade 1 cells in the anterior chamber (8.3% vs. 20.8%), with no statistically significant differences between the two groups (p = 0.61). Corneal edema had minimal variation between the groups (p = 0.77). By day 30, the Group-A however had no corneal edema in 91% patients, while the Group-B had edema in 66% cases. Pupillary membrane formation was slightly more common (12.5% vs 8.3%)  in the Group-B on day 1.</p> <p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> <br />Use of heparin may have a beneficial effect in reducing post-operative inflammation in traumatic cataract surgery. However, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant. </p>