| Literature DB >> 30425856 |
Dandan Wang1,2, Xiaoyu Yu1,2, Zhangliang Li1,2, Xixia Ding1,2, Hengli Lian1,2, Jianyang Mao1,2, Yinying Zhao1,2, Yun-E Zhao1,2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of anterior capsule polishing in patients with high myopia after cataract surgery.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30425856 PMCID: PMC6218722 DOI: 10.1155/2018/8676451
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Ophthalmol ISSN: 2090-004X Impact factor: 1.909
Figure 1Anterior segment of an aphakic eye imaged by the Pentacam Scheimpflug imaging system. L3: axis on the optical center of IOL; L4: axis on the center of pupilla; C1: the best-fit-circle on the anterior surface of IOL; C2: the best-fit-circle on the posterior surface of IOL; L1: horizontal line of IOL; L2: horizontal line of pupilla. The tilt of IOL is defined as the angle between L3 and L4. The decentration of IOL is defined as the distance between horizontal coordinates of P1 and P2.
The AL, refraction status, and anterior capsule opening size at the 1st day after surgery.
| Parameter ( | Polished | Unpolished |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AL (mm) | 29.90 ± 1.68 | 29.99 ± 1.86 | −0.544 | 0.583 |
| Refraction status (D) | −3.05 ± 0.91 | −2.70 ± 1.06 | −1.347 | 0.195 |
| Area (mm2) | 25.26 ± 1.21 | 25.46 ± 1.40 | −1.008 | 0.327 |
| Vertical Dia.(mm) | 5.45 ± 0.12 | 5.50 ± 0.10 | −1.644 | 0.118 |
| Horizontal dia. (mm) | 5.48 ± 0.10 | 5.51 ± 0.09 | −1.509 | 0.149 |
Cross-sectional comparison between polished and unpolished groups at the 1 month after surgery.
| Parameter ( | Polished | Unpolished |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Refraction status (D) | −3.00 ± 0.77 | −2.76 ± 1.12 | −1.124 | 0.276 |
| PAD (mm) | 4.79 ± 0.39 | 4.79 ± 0.39 | 0.076 | 0.940 |
| IOL tilt (°) | 0.49 ± 0.30 | 1.06 ± 0.90 | −0.364 | 0.065 |
| IOL decentration (mm) | 0.32 ± 0.16 | 0.38 ± 0.19 | −0.973 | 0.344 |
| Area (mm2) | 23.97 ± 1.34 | 23.78 ± 2.11 | 0.495 | 0.626 |
| Vertical dia. (mm) | 5.38 ± 0.17 | 5.38 ± 0.27 | 0.026 | 0.979 |
| Horizontal dia. (mm) | 5.37 ± 0.15 | 5.32 ± 0.22 | 1.208 | 0.243 |
Cross-sectional comparison between polished and unpolished groups at the 3 months after surgery.
| Parameter ( | Polished | Unpolished |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Refraction status (D) | −2.92 ± 0.74 | −2.76 ± 1.03 | −0.763 | 0.455 |
| PAD (mm) | 4.86 ± 0.41 | 4.87 ± 0.40 | −0.138 | 0.891 |
| IOL tilt (°) | 0.61 ± 0.41 | 1.13 ± 1.02 | −2.127 | 0.047 |
| IOL decentration (mm) | 0.37 ± 0.17 | 0.49 ± 0.22 | −2.154 | 0.045 |
| Area (mm2) | 23.41 ± 1.24 | 22.97 ± 2.14 | 1.018 | 0.322 |
| Vertical dia. (mm) | 5.35 ± 0.20 | 5.32 ± 0.25 | 0.527 | 0.605 |
| Horizontal dia.(mm) | 5.31 ± 0.16 | 5.26 ± 0.26 | 0.773 | 0.450 |
Significant at p < 0.05.
Cross-sectional comparison between polished and unpolished groups at the 6 months after surgery.
| Parameter ( | Polished | Unpolished |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Refraction status (D) | −2.97 ± 0.74 | −2.99 ± 1.11 | −0.127 | 0.900 |
| PAD (mm) | 4.87 ± 0.47 | 4.81 ± 0.42 | 0.645 | 0.527 |
| IOL tilt (°) | 0.69 ± 0.35 | 1.24 ± 1.00 | −2.519 | 0.021 |
| IOL decentration (mm) | 0.42 ± 0.14 | 0.55 ± 0.21 | −2.519 | 0.021 |
| Area (mm2) | 23.26 ± 1.24 | 22.64 ± 1.90 | 1.636 | 0.119 |
| Vertical dia. (mm) | 5.33 ± 0.18 | 5.26 ± 0.24 | 1.452 | 0.164 |
| Horizontal dia.(mm) | 5.28 ± 0.17 | 5.17 ± 0.25 | 1.563 | 0.135 |
Significant at p < 0.05.
Figure 2The differences in IOL stability between the two groups (Significant at p < 0.05).
Figure 3The differences in refraction and anterior capsule opening size between the two groups.