Comparison of clinical outcomes among 3 marking methods for toric intraocular lens implantation

Comparison of toric intraocular lens alignment between femtosecond laser-assisted capsular marking and digital marking

PURPOSE

To compare the accuracy of toric intraocular lens (IOL) alignment between femtosecond laser-assisted capsular marking and digital marking.

SETTING

Ruhr University Eye Clinic, Bochum, Germany.

DESIGN

Prospective clinical trial.

METHODS

In this study, 28 eyes of 23 patients, who underwent femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery with implantation of a toric IOL, were included. Intraoperatively, both femtosecond laser-assisted capsular marking and digital marking were applied simultaneously and compared in every case. The toric IOL was aligned to the capsular markings. Postoperatively, the axis of the capsular markings and toric IOL alignment was examined. Visual acuity and refractive outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Both alignment methods were performed without intraoperative complications in all cases. 25 eyes were included in the final analysis. Misalignment was significantly lower with femtosecond laser-assisted capsular marking than with digital marking (1.71 ± 1.25 degrees vs 2.64 ± 1.70 degrees, P = .016). Deviation from the target axis of the toric IOL was 1.62 ± 1.24 degrees 4 to 6 weeks postoperatively. Postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity was 0.14 ± 0.13 logMAR, and residual astigmatism was 0.3 ± 0.23 diopter (D) with an astigmatism ≤0.5 D in 93% of eyes.

CONCLUSIONS

Both methods showed excellent results for the alignment of toric IOLs. However, femtosecond laser-assisted capsular marking was significantly more precise than digital marking and showed good refractive results. In addition, capsular marking offers the possibility to avoid parallax error and evaluating postoperative IOL rotation.

Comparison of the Orientation of the Corneal Steep Meridian Determined by Image-Guided System and Manual Method in the Same Eye

Purpose

To evaluate the difference between the preoperative marking methods for toric intraocular lens (IOL) implantations using an image-guided system (IGS) and the manual marking method in the same eye.

Patients and Methods

In this retrospective case series, 82 patients (101 eyes) who underwent cataract surgery using both manual and IGS (VERION, Alcon  Laboratories) marking were enrolled. First, preoperative reference marks were placed at 6 o’clock and 3 or 9 o’clock position under slit-lamp biomicroscope in the outpatient department using the manual method. Using the reference unit of IGS, the ocular surface data were captured and overlaid. The difference was then measured (preoperative axis misalignment). In the operating room, the orientation of the steep meridian of the manual method was determined based on this reference mark under the surgical microscope. Just before surgery, the digital degree gauge of IGS was overlaid on the ocular surface, and the difference was then measured (total axis misalignment). We calculated the intraoperative axis misalignment by subtracting preoperative axis misalignment from the total axis misalignment.

Results

Mean absolute preoperative, intraoperative, and total axis misalignment values were 3.87±3.95 degrees, 5.46±4.42 degrees, and 4.98±4.49 degrees, respectively. In preoperative, intraoperative, and total misalignment, the ratios of 10 degrees or greater were 10 (14.7%), 12 (17.6%), and 20 (19.8%) eyes, respectively.

Conclusion

The manual method that determines the fixed position of the toric intraocular lens (IOL) may cause large misalignment compared with the IGS, suggesting that using manual method could sometimes result in a large misalignment of toric IOL implantation.

Point your SmartPhone at the code above. If you have a QR code reader the video abstract will appear. Or use:

https://youtu.be/S78zLTVpriI

Rotational slit-beam marking: an advanced manual corneal astigmatic marking method for toric intraocular lens implantation

PURPOSE

To evaluate the accuracy of an advanced manual corneal astigmatic marking method for toric intraocular lens (IOL) implantation.

METHODS

From 52 patients, 52 eyes with cataracts and corneal astigmatism were included. The target axis of the toric IOL was marked with the new manual marking method preoperatively and with the Zeiss CALLISTO Eye image-guided system intraoperatively. For the manual method, a slit-lamp with a minimum rotation angle of 5 degrees was used and rotated to the meridian of the toric IOL and incision axes. The relative rotational and vertical deviation of the IOL and incision axes were measured using the digital marker as a reference.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the manually marked IOL axis (100.9° ± 65.62°) and the digital mark (100.8° ± 65.76°; P = 0.771). The absolute values of the relative rotational and vertical deviations of the manually marked IOL axis were small, at 2.03° ± 1.44° and 0.46 ± 0.43 mm, respectively. There was no significant difference between the manually marked corneal incision and the digital meridian (P = 0.179). Then, patients were classified into three groups based on the type of astigmatism they had. There was no significant difference in mean absolute deviation among the groups (P = 0.112). The manual incision mark had a relative rotational deviation of 1.65° ± 1.44°. The vertical misalignment of the manually marked incision axis was 0.27 ± 0.30 mm.

CONCLUSION

Rotational slit-beam marking could be an effective and convenient marking method for toric IOL implantation. This method could be a potential alternative in underdeveloped areas where digital image-guided systems are not available.

Simple steep-axis marking technique using a corneal analyzer

We describe a simple steep-axis marking technique that uses a corneal analyzer (OPD III scan) during arcuate keratotomy in femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery. The technique requires a single reference mark at the limbus, which does not have to be on the horizontal axis. Using the corneal analyzer, the angle between the steep axis and the reference line between the reference mark and the center of the cornea can be determined. The angle from the reference mark is used intraoperatively to locate the steep axis. This eliminates the potential error from different head positions during keratometry measurement and during traditional marking under the slitlamp. The marking technique can also be applied to toric intraocular lens implantation during cataract surgery.

Consensus on the management of astigmatism in cataract surgery

This project was aimed at achieving consensus on the management of astigmatism during cataract surgery by ophthalmologists from Latin America using modified Delphi technique. Relevant peer-reviewed literature was identified, and 21 clinical research questions associated with the definition, classification, measurement, and treatment of astigmatism during cataract surgery were formulated. Twenty participants were divided into seven groups, and each group was assigned three questions to which they had to respond in written form, after thoroughly reviewing the literature. The assigned questions with corresponding responses by each group were discussed with other participants in round 4 – presentation of findings. The consensus was achieved if approval was obtained from at least 80% of participants. The present paper provides several agreements and recommendations for management of astigmatism during cataract surgery, which could potentially minimize the variability in practice patterns and help ophthalmologists adopt optimal practices for cataract patients with astigmatism and improve patient satisfaction.

Comparative evaluation of toric intraocular lens alignment and visual quality with image-guided surgery and conventional three-step manual marking

Purpose

To compare toric intraocular lens (IOL) alignment assisted by image-guided surgery or manual marking methods and its impact on visual quality.

Patients and methods

This prospective comparative study enrolled 80 eyes with cataract and astigmatism ≥1.5 D to undergo phacoemulsification with toric IOL alignment by manual marking method using bubble marker (group I, n=40) or Callisto eye and Z align (group II, n=40). Postoperatively, accuracy of alignment and visual quality was assessed with a ray tracing aberrometer. Primary outcome measure was deviation from the target axis of implantation. Secondary outcome measures were visual quality and acuity. Follow-up was performed on postoperative days (PODs) 1 and 30.

Results

Deviation from the target axis of implantation was significantly less in group II on PODs 1 and 30 (group I: 5.5°±3.3°, group II: 3.6°±2.6°; p=0.005). Postoperative refractive cylinder was −0.89±0.35 D in group I and −0.64±0.36 D in group II (p=0.003). Visual acuity was comparable between both the groups. Visual quality measured in terms of Strehl ratio (p<0.05) and modulation transfer function (MTF) (p<0.05) was significantly better in the image-guided surgery group. Significant negative correlation was observed between deviation from target axis and visual quality parameters (Strehl ratio and MTF) (p<0.05).

Conclusion

Image-guided surgery allows precise alignment of toric IOL without need for reference marking. It is associated with superior visual quality which correlates with the precision of IOL alignment.

Optimizing outcomes with toric intraocular lenses

Toric intraocular lenses (IOLs) are the procedure of choice to correct corneal astigmatism of 1 D or more in cases undergoing cataract surgery. Comprehensive literature search was performed in MEDLINE using “toric intraocular lenses,” “astigmatism,” and “cataract surgery” as keywords. The outcomes after toric IOL implantation are influenced by numerous factors, right from the preoperative case selection and investigations to accurate intraoperative alignment and postoperative care. Enhanced accuracy of keratometry estimation may be achieved by taking multiple measurements and employing at least two separate devices based on different principles. The importance of posterior corneal curvature is increasingly being recognized in various studies, and newer investigative modalities that account for both the anterior and posterior corneal power are becoming the standard of care. An ideal IOL power calculation formula should take into account the surgically induced astigmatism, the posterior corneal curvature as well as the effective lens position. Conventional manual marking has given way to image-guided systems and intraoperative aberrometry, which provide a mark-less IOL alignment and also aid in planning the incisions, capsulorhexis size, and optimal IOL centration. Postoperative toric IOL misalignment is the major factor responsible for suboptimal visual outcomes after toric IOL implantation. Realignment of the toric IOL is needed in 0.65%–3.3% cases, with more than 10° of rotation from the target axis. Newer toric IOLs have enhanced rotational stability and provide precise visual outcomes with minimal higher order aberrations.