| Literature DB >> 32375708 |
Timur M Yildirim1, Hui Fang1, Sonja K Schickhardt1, Qiang Wang1,2, Patrick R Merz1, Gerd U Auffarth3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The formation of fluid-filled microvacuoles, termed glistenings, is a common complication of intraocular lenses (IOLs) made from hydrophobic acrylate. Using our well-established in-vitro laboratory method, we evaluated a new IOL material's resistance to glistening formation.Entities:
Keywords: AcrySof; Eyecryl; Glistenings; Hydrophobic acrylic; IOL aging; IOL material change; IOL material quality; IOL pathology
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32375708 PMCID: PMC7204243 DOI: 10.1186/s12886-020-01430-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Ophthalmol ISSN: 1471-2415 Impact factor: 2.209
Characteristics of the studied IOL materials
| IOL model | Manufacturer | Optic Copolymer | Cross-Linker | Equilibrium Water Content | Blue-Light Filter | Manufacturing process |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Eyecryl Plus ASHFY600 | Biotech | Phenylethyl acrylate (PEA) and phenylethyl methacrylate (PEMA) | n.d. | < 5% | Yes | Lathe-cut |
AcrySof IQ SN60WF | Alcon | Phenylethyl acrylate (PEA) and phenylethyl methacrylate (PEMA) | butanediol diacrylate (BDDA) | 0.1–0.5 | Yes | Cast-moulding |
IOL intraocular lens, n.d. not disclosed
Fig. 1Setup for evaluation of glistenings. Left to right: Heated stage used to maintain and monitor the temperature during glistening evaluation; Microscope over a Petri dish including an IOL under test on an illuminated, heated plate; Laptop with image analysis software
Fig. 2Intraocular lens optic sectioned by a standard grid. In all IOLs, 5 sections of the lens optic were analysed (central, left, upper, right, lower)
Fig. 3Binary transformed exemplary images. a Saturation and Brightness were adjusted and a color threhold technique was applied to separate glistening particles (red) from the background (black). b Counting of the glistenings (here blue) was performed automatically by an image analysis software (ImageJ, 1.49v) [11]
Fig. 4Microscopic images of the central part of all tested IOLs. Images were obtained under a microscope in a 90-fold magnification after standardized accelerated glistening induction
Density of glistenings. Comparison of the mean values of the two studied intraocular lens models
| central part | mean of 5 sections | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IOL | Eyecryl | AcrySof | Eyecryl | AcrySof | ||
Average MV/mm2 (± standard deviation) | 0.7 (±0.5) | 41.8 (±27.7) | 0.5 (±0.2) | 19.9 (±10.6) | ||
IOL intraocular lens, MV/mm microvacuoles per square millimetre, *student’s t-test
Fig. 5Number of glistenings in the central part of all tested IOLs after accelerated glistening induction. The secondary y-axis shows the relationship to the Miyata grading system. MVs/mm2, microvacuoles per square millimetre