Literature DB >> 31371148

Surface properties of commercially available hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lenses: Comparative study.

Chiara De Giacinto1, Davide Porrelli2, Gianluca Turco2, Marco Rocco Pastore3, Rossella D'Aloisio3, Daniele Tognetto3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To analyze and compare the surface properties of commercially available hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lenses (IOLs).
SETTING: Eye Clinic, University of Trieste, Italy.
DESIGN: Experimental study.
METHODS: The following 6 single-piece hydrophobic acrylic IOL models with the same dioptric power were studied and compared: Clareon SY60WF, Tecnis PCB00, enVista MX60, CT Lucia 601P, Vivinex iSert XY1, and iSert 251. Topography of the IOL surface was analyzed using atomic force microscopy (AFM). Surface contact angle measurements using the sessile drop method were performed to assess IOL wettability.
RESULTS: The AFM analysis showed that the Vivinex iSert XY1 IOL and Clareon SY60WF IOL had the lowest surface roughness (P < .05); there was no statistically significant difference in surface roughness between the those 2 IOL models (P > .05). Surface contact angle measurements showed that the iSert 251 IOL had the highest hydrophobicity. The CT Lucia 601P IOL had the lowest contact angle of all IOL models.
CONCLUSIONS: The AFM analysis and surface contact angle measurements of all IOLs tested showed that the Vivinex iSert XY1 IOL and Clareon SY60WF IOL had the best topographic features. The smoother, more regular surface of these new IOL models might reduce cell adhesion and therefore lower the incidence of posterior capsule opacification.
Copyright © 2019 ASCRS and ESCRS. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Year:  2019        PMID: 31371148     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2019.04.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg        ISSN: 0886-3350            Impact factor:   3.351


  5 in total

1.  Predictive accuracy of an intraoperative aberrometry device for a new monofocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  Lindsay S Spekreijse; Noel J C Bauer; Frank J H M van den Biggelaar; Rob W P Simons; Claudette A Veldhuizen; Tos T J M Berendschot; Rudy M M A Nuijts
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2021-08-19       Impact factor: 3.528

2.  Analysis of opacification patterns in intraocular lenses (IOL).

Authors:  Marc Mackert; Daniel Rudolf Muth; Efstathios Vounotrypidis; Constanze Deger; David Goldblum; Mehdi Shajari; Pascal Willy Hasler; Siegfried Priglinger; Armin Wolf
Journal:  BMJ Open Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-02-11

3.  Refractive and Visual Outcomes of a Monofocal Non-Constant Aberration Aspheric Intraocular Lens.

Authors:  Adrián Hernández-Martínez; Miguel A Díaz-Del-Rio; María Ruiz-Santos; Ramón Ruiz-Mesa; Pedro Tañá-Rivero
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-08-10

4.  Refractive stability of a new single-piece hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lens and corneal wound repair after implantation using a new automated intraocular lens delivery system.

Authors:  Kazuno Negishi; Sachiko Masui; Hidemasa Torii; Yasuyo Nishi; Kazuo Tsubota
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-09-02       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Atomic force microscopy comparative analysis of the surface roughness of two posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens models: ICL versus IPCL.

Authors:  Juan Gros-Otero; Samira Ketabi; Rafael Cañones-Zafra; Montserrat Garcia-Gonzalez; Cesar Villa-Collar; Santiago Casado; Miguel A Teus
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-07-14       Impact factor: 2.209

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.