Literature DB >> 24590672

Types of intraocular lenses for cataract surgery in eyes with uveitis.

Theresa G Leung1, Kristina Lindsley, Irene C Kuo.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cataract formation often occurs in people with uveitis. It is unclear which intraocular lens (IOL) type is optimal for use in cataract surgery for eyes with uveitis.
OBJECTIVES: To summarize the effects of different IOLs on visual acuity, other visual outcomes, and quality of life in people with uveitis. SEARCH
METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 7), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to August 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to August 2013), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to August 2013), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 14 August 2013. We also performed forward and backward searching using the Science Citation Index and the reference lists of the included studies, respectively, in August 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing hydrophobic or hydrophilic acrylic, silicone, or poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) IOLs with or without heparin-surface modification (HSM), with each other, or with no treatment in adults with uveitis, for any indication, undergoing cataract surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Two review authors screened the search results and for included studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data independently. We contacted study investigators for additional information. We did not perform a meta-analysis due to variability in reporting and follow-up intervals for the primary and secondary outcomes of interest. MAIN
RESULTS: We included four RCTs involving 216 participants (range of 2 to 140 participants with uveitic cataract per trial) and comparing up to four types of IOLs. The largest study was an international study with centers in Brazil, Egypt, Finland, France, Japan, the Netherlands, Slovak Republic, Spain, and the USA; two studies were conducted in Germany and one in Saudi Arabia. There was substantial heterogeneity with respect to the ages of participants and etiologies of uveitis within and across studies. The length of follow-up among the studies ranged from 1 to 24 months after cataract surgery. The studies were at low risk of selection bias, but two of the four studies did not employ masking and only one study included all randomized participants in the final analyses. The funding source was disclosed by investigators of the largest study (professional society) and not reported by the other three. Due to heterogeneity in lens types evaluated and outcomes reported among the trials, we did not combine data in a meta-analysis.In the largest study (140 participants), the study eye of each participant was randomized to receive one of four types of IOLs: hydrophobic acrylic, silicone, HSM PMMA, or unmodified PMMA. Proportions of participants with one or more Snellen lines of visual improvement were similar among the four treatment groups at one year' follow-up: 45 of 48 (94%) in the hydrophobic acrylic IOL group, 39 of 44 (89%) in the silicone IOL group, 18 of 22 (82%) in the HSM PMMA IOL group, and 22 of 26 (85%) in the unmodified PMMA IOL group. When comparing hydrophobic acrylic IOLs with silicone IOLs, the risk ratio (RR) was 1.06 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.20). At one year' follow-up, fewer eyes randomized to hydrophobic acrylic IOLs developed posterior synechiae when compared with eyes receiving silicone IOLs (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.79); the effects between these groups were less certain with respect to developing posterior capsule opacification (PCO) (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.37), corneal edema (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.12), cystoid macular edema (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.84), or mild IOL decentration (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.06 to 14.22).Two intra-individual studies also compared HSM PMMA IOLs with unmodified PMMA IOLs at three or six months of follow-up. These studies, including a combined total of 16 participants with uveitis, were insufficiently powered to detect differences in outcomes among eyes of people with uveitis randomized to receive HSM PMMA IOLs when compared with fellow eyes receiving unmodified PMMA IOLs.In the fourth study (60 participants), the study eye of each participant was randomized to receive a hydrophobic or hydrophilic acrylic IOL. At three months, there were no statistical or clinical differences between hydrophobic and hydrophilic acrylic IOL types in the proportions of participants with two or more Snellen lines of visual improvement (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.22). There were similar rates in the development of PCO between hydrophobic or hydrophilic acrylic IOLs at six months' follow-up (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.25). The effect of the lenses on posterior synechiae was uncertain at six months' follow-up (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.22).None of the included studies reported quality of life outcomes. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the trials identified in this review, there is uncertainty as to which type of IOL provides the best visual and clinical outcomes in people with uveitis undergoing cataract surgery. The studies were small, not all lens materials were compared in all studies, and not all lens materials were available in all study sites. Evidence of a superior effect of hydrophobic acrylic lenses over silicone lenses, specifically for posterior synechiae outcomes comes from a single study at a high risk of performance and detection bias. However, due to small sample sizes and heterogeneity in outcome reporting, we found insufficient information to assess these and other types of IOL materials for cataract surgery for eyes with uveitis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24590672      PMCID: PMC4261623          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007284.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  44 in total

1.  Chronic severe uveitis: etiology and visual outcome in 927 patients from a single center.

Authors:  B Bodaghi; N Cassoux; B Wechsler; D Hannouche; C Fardeau; T Papo; D L Huong; J C Piette; P LeHoang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 1.889

2.  Assessment of visual outcome after cataract surgery in patients with uveitis.

Authors:  N Okhravi; S L Lightman; H M Towler
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 12.079

3.  How to identify randomized controlled trials in MEDLINE: ten years on.

Authors:  Julie M Glanville; Carol Lefebvre; Jeremy N V Miles; Janette Camosso-Stefinovic
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2006-04

4.  Cataract surgery in uveitis.

Authors:  Martin Roesel; Carsten Heinz; Joerg Michael Koch; Arnd Heiligenhaus
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 12.079

5.  Heparin surface-modified intraocular lenses in patients with inactive uveitis or diabetes.

Authors:  K F Tabbara; A S Al-Kaff; A A Al-Rajhi; S M Al-Mansouri; I A Badr; P S Chavis; O M Al-Omar
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 12.079

6.  Phacoemulsification cataract extraction and posterior chamber lens implantation in patients with uveitis.

Authors:  M F Estafanous; C Y Lowder; D M Meisler; R Chauhan
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 5.258

7.  Management of bilateral idiopathic healed sclerokeratouveitis with ciliary and intercalary staphyloma with complicated cataract and secondary glaucoma.

Authors:  Ruchi Goel; Lanalyn Thangkhiew; Usha Yadava; Sushil Kumar
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2010 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.848

8.  Inflammation after implantation of hydrophilic acrylic, hydrophobic acrylic, or silicone intraocular lenses in eyes with cataract and uveitis: comparison to a control group.

Authors:  Claudette Abela-Formanek; Michael Amon; Gebtraud Schild; Jörg Schauersberger; Julia Kolodjaschna; Talin Barisani-Asenbaum; Andreas Kruger
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 3.351

9.  Intraocular lens implantation versus no intraocular lens implantation in patients with chronic iridocyclitis and pars planitis. A randomized prospective study.

Authors:  H H Tessler; M D Farber
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 12.079

10.  Comparison of intraocular lens types for cataract surgery in eyes with uveitis.

Authors:  Elizabeth Ssemanda; Kristina Lindsley; Ann-Margret Ervin; John Kempen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2008-07-16
View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  [Pharmacological treatment strategies and surgical options for uveitis].

Authors:  Justus G Garweg
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 1.059

2.  Outcomes of cataract surgery with/without vitrectomy in patients with pars planitis and immunosuppressive therapy.

Authors:  Tania Albavera-Giles; Juan Carlos Serna-Ojeda; Aida Jimenez-Corona; Miguel Pedroza-Seres
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-04-10       Impact factor: 3.117

3.  Identification and Description of Reliable Evidence for 2016 American Academy of Ophthalmology Preferred Practice Pattern Guidelines for Cataract in the Adult Eye.

Authors:  Asieh Golozar; Yujiang Chen; Kristina Lindsley; Benjamin Rouse; David C Musch; Flora Lum; Barbara S Hawkins; Tianjing Li
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 7.389

4.  Perioperative Management of Uveitic Cataracts.

Authors:  Judy L Chen; Pooja Bhat; Ann-Marie Lobo-Chan
Journal:  Adv Ophthalmol Optom       Date:  2019-05-18

Review 5.  Decision-making and management of uveitic cataract.

Authors:  Nicole Shu-Wen Chan; Seng-Ei Ti; Soon-Phaik Chee
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 1.848

6.  Glued intraocular lens implantation for eyes with inadequate capsular support: Analysis of the postoperative visual outcome.

Authors:  Sujatha Mohan; Bina John; Mohan Rajan; Harsha Malkani; S V Nagalekshmi; Siddhartha Singh
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.848

7.  Challenges with cataract surgery in pars planitis patients.

Authors:  Andrzej Grzybowski; Piotr Kanclerz; Uwe Pleyer
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-06-07       Impact factor: 3.117

8.  Managing cataract surgery in patients with uveitis.

Authors:  Aravind Harapriya; Eliza Anthony
Journal:  Community Eye Health       Date:  2019

Review 9.  Controversies in intraocular lens implantation in pediatric uveitis.

Authors:  Sumita Phatak; Careen Lowder; Carlos Pavesio
Journal:  J Ophthalmic Inflamm Infect       Date:  2016-03-24

10.  Uveitis and deficient lens capsules: Effect of glued intraocular lens on the visual outcome and the reactivation of inflammation.

Authors:  Dhivya Ashok Kumar; Amar Agarwal; Wasim Raja Kader Ali
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 1.848

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.