Literature DB >> 17070590

Comparison of outcomes of primary scleral-fixated versus primary anterior chamber intraocular lens implantation in complicated cataract surgeries.

Yolanda Y Y Kwong1, Hunter K L Yuen, Robert F Lam, Vincent Y W Lee, Srinivas K Rao, Dennis S C Lam.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the visual outcomes and complication profiles of primary scleral-fixated intraocular lens (SFIOL) versus primary anterior chamber intraocular lens (ACIOL) implantation in cataract surgeries complicated by inadequate capsular support.
DESIGN: Retrospective, interventional, comparative cases series. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-six eyes of 36 patients undergoing SFIOL implantation (group 1) and 46 eyes of 46 patients undergoing ACIOL implantation (group 2).
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of medical records of a consecutive series of complicated cataract surgeries with primary SFIOL or ACIOL implantation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraoperative and postoperative complications, if any, and postoperative corneal endothelial cell counts. A multiple linear regression model was constructed with postoperative BCVA as the dependent variable and with IOL group (SFIOL vs. ACIOL), preoperative BCVA, surgeon's operative experience, planned operation, and patient's age as independent variables.
RESULTS: Fifty-eight percent (group 1) and 37% (group 2) of patients underwent phacoemulsification, whereas the rest underwent extracapsular cataract extraction. The mean postoperative follow-up was 33.4+/-17.9 months (range, 6-61 months). Postoperative Snellen BCVA of 20/40 or better was achieved in 47.2% (group 1) and 71.7% (group 2) of patients (P = 0.038). Regression analysis showed that primary ACIOL implantation was associated with a significantly better postoperative BCVA of -0.157 on the logarithm of minimum angle of resolution scale (95% confidence interval, -0.306 to -0.007; P = 0.040), compared with primary SFIOL implantation. Although both the number of eyes with complications and the total number of complications were higher in the SFIOL group, the differences in early (P = 0.073) and late (P = 0.377) complications were not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that satisfactory results are achieved with primary implantation of current open-loop ACIOLs during cataract surgery complicated by loss of posterior capsule integrity. Eyes with these IOLs fared better than a cohort of eyes undergoing SFIOL implantation in a similar situation, at intermediate-term follow-up. Further prospective clinical trials with longer follow-up may help to evaluate the long-term visual outcomes and complication profiles after primary implantation of these lenses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17070590     DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.11.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmology        ISSN: 0161-6420            Impact factor:   12.079


  21 in total

1.  Incidence of cystoid macular edema with iris-fixated posterior chamber intraocular lenses in patients presenting with lens dislocation.

Authors:  Irene Rusu; Zhe Chen; Jessica Zizva; Jane S Myung; Kenneth J Wald
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-07-25       Impact factor: 2.031

2.  Reinforced scleral fixation of foldable intraocular lens by double sutures: comparison with intrascleral intraocular lens fixation.

Authors:  Yodpong Chantarasorn; Settapong Techalertsuwan; Pongsavit Siripanthong; Anurak Tamerug
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-02-20       Impact factor: 2.447

Review 3.  Anterior chamber intraocular lens, sutured posterior chamber intraocular lens, or glued intraocular lens: where do we stand?

Authors:  Derick G Holt; Jason Young; Brian Stagg; Balamurali K Ambati
Journal:  Curr Opin Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 3.761

4.  Comparison of iris-fixated foldable lens and scleral-fixated foldable lens implantation in eyes with insufficient capsular support.

Authors:  Han Zhang; Jun Zhao; Li-Jun Zhang; Jing Liu; Yuan Liu; Wei Song; Qing-Fen Tian; Qi Wang; David-Rex Hamilton
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 1.779

5.  Anterior chamber lens implantation in vitrectomised eyes.

Authors:  G S Negretti; M Lai; P Petrou; R Walker; D Charteris
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2017-12-08       Impact factor: 3.775

6.  Scleral-Fixated Intraocular Lenses: Past and Present.

Authors:  Maxwell S Stem; Bozho Todorich; Maria A Woodward; Jason Hsu; Jeremy D Wolfe
Journal:  J Vitreoretin Dis       Date:  2017-03-02

7.  Iris Claw versus Scleral Fixation Intraocular Lens Implantation during Pars Plana Vitrectomy.

Authors:  Fereydoun Farrahi; Mostafa Feghhi; Foad Haghi; Ali Kasiri; Abbas Afkari; Mahmood Latifi
Journal:  J Ophthalmic Vis Res       Date:  2012-04

8.  Aphakia correction with retropupillary fixated iris-claw lens (Artisan) - long-term results.

Authors:  Maurice Schallenberg; Dirk Dekowski; Angela Hahn; Thomas Laube; Klaus-Peter Steuhl; Daniel Meller
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-12-23

9.  Long-term follow-up of retropupillary iris-claw intraocular lens implantation: a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Matteo Forlini; Wael Soliman; Adriana Bratu; Paolo Rossini; Gian Maria Cavallini; Cesare Forlini
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-10-27       Impact factor: 2.209

10.  Iris-claw intraocular lens implantation: Anterior chamber versus retropupillary implantation.

Authors:  Sezer Helvaci; Selahaddin Demirduzen; Huseyin Oksuz
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 1.848

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.