M U Saeed1, A J Jafree, R de Cock. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, William Harvey Hospital, Willesborough, Ashford, Kent, UK. musmansaeed@aol.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: To find out the incidence of intraocular lens (IOL) optic opacification in a suspect IOL. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients' notes 3-4 years postimplant. RESULTS: In all, 56 IOLs showed signs of opacification, resulting in reduced vision out of 181 lenses traced. CONCLUSION: Certain hydrophilic acrylic IOLs like the model in question (SC60B-0UV) show opacification of the IOL, which may impair the vision of pseudophakic patients. However, not all lenses of this variety exhibit this cloudiness. Factors affecting this phenomenon are not yet completely clear but may include changes in the UV absorbant material incorporated in the lens substance itself. We report a series of patients who had received this lens and experienced loss of vision due to opacification of the IOL. In a follow-up ranging from 1 to 4 years postoperatively, a higher incidence of postoperative opacification of this lens emerges, after comparison with existing literature. IOL exchange in such patients is the only option. However, this mode of treatment should not be offered lightly as results may be guarded at best even in the face of a technically satisfactory procedure.
PURPOSE: To find out the incidence of intraocular lens (IOL) optic opacification in a suspect IOL. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients' notes 3-4 years postimplant. RESULTS: In all, 56 IOLs showed signs of opacification, resulting in reduced vision out of 181 lenses traced. CONCLUSION: Certain hydrophilic acrylic IOLs like the model in question (SC60B-0UV) show opacification of the IOL, which may impair the vision of pseudophakic patients. However, not all lenses of this variety exhibit this cloudiness. Factors affecting this phenomenon are not yet completely clear but may include changes in the UV absorbant material incorporated in the lens substance itself. We report a series of patients who had received this lens and experienced loss of vision due to opacification of the IOL. In a follow-up ranging from 1 to 4 years postoperatively, a higher incidence of postoperative opacification of this lens emerges, after comparison with existing literature. IOL exchange in such patients is the only option. However, this mode of treatment should not be offered lightly as results may be guarded at best even in the face of a technically satisfactory procedure.
Authors: Nathaniel E Knox Cartwright; Eric J Mayer; Brendan M McDonald; Andrew Skinner; Chris J Salter; Derek M Tole; John M Sparrow; Andrew D Dick; David J P Ferguson Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2006-09-20 Impact factor: 4.638