PURPOSE: To compare visual and refractive results of Toric Implantable Collamer Lens (TICL) and bioptics (ICL plus excimer corneal surgery) to treat myopic astigmatism. METHODS: Eighty-one eyes underwent TICL implantation and 83 eyes were treated with bioptics (corneal ablation was performed between 1.5 and 6 months after ICL implantation). Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), refraction, adverse events, safety, and efficacy were evaluated 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: At 12 months postoperatively, the mean spherical equivalent was -0.15 ± 0.36 diopters (D) in the TICL group and -0.08 ± 0.26 D in the bioptics group (p = 0.099). Sixty-six (81.5 %) and 78 (94.0 %) eyes were within ±0.50 D for TICL and bioptics groups, respectively. The mean Snellen UDVA was not statistically different between both procedures (p = 0.909); 53 (65.4 %) and 54 (65.1 %) eyes achieved at least 20/25 or better in TICL and bioptics groups, respectively. No eye had lost more than two lines of CDVA, and 32.1 % of eyes (26/81) in the TICL group and 57.8 % of eyes (48/83) in the bioptics group had better postoperative UDVA than preoperative CDVA (p < 0.001). Safety was not statistically different between groups (p = 0.464) while efficacy was significantly higher in the bioptics group (p = 0.000). Two eyes with a TICL were treated to correct TICL decentration. CONCLUSIONS: Bioptics showed slightly better outcomes in some clinical measures such as uncorrected visual acuity, efficacy, and refractive predictability. TICL implantation shows reliable results similar to bioptics. A single procedure with TICL implantation might be preferred, eliminating the inherent risks of laser treatments and the risks of a second surgical procedure.
PURPOSE: To compare visual and refractive results of Toric Implantable Collamer Lens (TICL) and bioptics (ICL plus excimer corneal surgery) to treat myopic astigmatism. METHODS: Eighty-one eyes underwent TICL implantation and 83 eyes were treated with bioptics (corneal ablation was performed between 1.5 and 6 months after ICL implantation). Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), refraction, adverse events, safety, and efficacy were evaluated 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: At 12 months postoperatively, the mean spherical equivalent was -0.15 ± 0.36 diopters (D) in the TICL group and -0.08 ± 0.26 D in the bioptics group (p = 0.099). Sixty-six (81.5 %) and 78 (94.0 %) eyes were within ±0.50 D for TICL and bioptics groups, respectively. The mean Snellen UDVA was not statistically different between both procedures (p = 0.909); 53 (65.4 %) and 54 (65.1 %) eyes achieved at least 20/25 or better in TICL and bioptics groups, respectively. No eye had lost more than two lines of CDVA, and 32.1 % of eyes (26/81) in the TICL group and 57.8 % of eyes (48/83) in the bioptics group had better postoperative UDVA than preoperative CDVA (p < 0.001). Safety was not statistically different between groups (p = 0.464) while efficacy was significantly higher in the bioptics group (p = 0.000). Two eyes with a TICL were treated to correct TICL decentration. CONCLUSIONS: Bioptics showed slightly better outcomes in some clinical measures such as uncorrected visual acuity, efficacy, and refractive predictability. TICL implantation shows reliable results similar to bioptics. A single procedure with TICL implantation might be preferred, eliminating the inherent risks of laser treatments and the risks of a second surgical procedure.
Authors: José F Alfonso; Begoña Baamonde; Luis Fernández-Vega; Paulo Fernandes; Jose M González-Méijome; Robert Montés-Micó Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 3.351
Authors: José F Alfonso; Luis Fernández-Vega; Paulo Fernandes; José M González-Méijome; Robert Montés-Micó Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 3.351
Authors: Donald R Sanders; David Schneider; Robert Martin; David Brown; David Dulaney; John Vukich; Stephen Slade; Steven Schallhorn Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Paulo Fernandes; José M González-Méijome; David Madrid-Costa; Teresa Ferrer-Blasco; Jorge Jorge; Robert Montés-Micó Journal: J Refract Surg Date: 2011-06-30 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: José F Alfonso; Begoña Baamonde; David Madrid-Costa; Paulo Fernandes; Jorge Jorge; Robert Montés-Micó Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 3.351
Authors: José F Alfonso; Carlos Lisa; Ana Palacios; Paulo Fernandes; José M González-Méijome; Robert Montés-Micó Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2009-03-14 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Steven C Schallhorn; Ayad A Farjo; David Huang; Brian S Boxer Wachler; William B Trattler; David J Tanzer; Parag A Majmudar; Alan Sugar Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Farideh Doroodgar; Feazollah Niazi; Azad Sanginabadi; Sana Niazi; Alireza Baradaran-Rafii; Cyrus Alinia; Eznollah Azargashb; Mohammad Ghoreishi Journal: BMJ Open Ophthalmol Date: 2017-09-28
Authors: Majid Moshirfar; Robert J Thomson; William B West Jnr; Shannon E McCabe; Thomas M Sant; Margaret H Shmunes; Yasmyne C Ronquillo; Phillip C Hoopes Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2020-12-09
Authors: Majid Moshirfar; Nour Bundogji; Alyson N Tukan; James H Ellis; Shannon E McCabe; Ayesha Patil; Yasmyne C Ronquillo; Phillip C Hoopes Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2021-07-06