Outcomes of implantation of modified capsule tension rings with multiple black occluder paddles for eyes with congenital and acquired iris defects: Report 3

Utilizing 3D Printing Technology to Create Prosthetic Irises: Proof of Concept and Workflow

PURPOSE

There are currently limited treatment options for aniridia. In this context, 3D printed iris implants may provide a cost-effective, cosmetically acceptable alternative for patients with aniridia. The purpose of this study was to develop a proof-of-concept workflow for manufacturing 3D printed iris implants using a silicone ink palette that aesthetically matches iris shades, identified in slit lamp images.

METHODS

Slit lamp iris photos from 11 healthy volunteers (3 green; 4 blue; 4 brown) were processed using k-means binning analyses to identify two or three prominent colors each. Candidate silicone inks were created by precisely combining pigments. A crowdsourcing survey software was used to determine color matches between the silicone ink swatches and three prominent iris color swatches in 2 qualifying and 11 experimental workflows.

RESULTS

In total, 54 candidate silicone inks (20 brown; 16 green; 18 blue) were developed and analyzed. Survey answers from 29 individuals that had passed the qualifying workflow were invited to identify "best matches" between the prominent iris colors and the silicone inks. From this color-match data, brown, blue, and green prototype artificial irises were printed with the silicone ink that aesthetically matched the three prominent colors. The iris was printed using a simplified three-layer five-branch starburst design at scale (12.8 mm base disc, with 3.5 mm pupil).

CONCLUSIONS

This proof-of-concept workflow produced color-matched silicone prosthetic irises at scale from a panel of silicone inks using prominent iris colors extracted from slit lamp images. Future work will include printing a more intricate iris crypt design and testing for biocompatibility.

Flexible silicone artificial iris in cases of aniridia and iris deficiencies

PURPOSE

To evaluate a customized silicone flexible artificial iris in cases of aniridia or iris deficiencies.

SETTING

Centre Hospitalier National d'Ophtalmologie, Hôpital des Quinze-Vingts, Paris, France.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series investigating cosmetic result, photophobia, endothelial cell density and intraocular pressure.

METHODS

Patients with iris deficiencies requiring cataract surgery or correction of aphakia, or pseudophakic patients, complaining of photophobia or cosmetic disturbances were implanted with the new flexible artificial iris.

RESULTS

Fifteen eyes of 14 patients were evaluated. Mean age was: 49.5 (±18.5). A total of 50% were aphakic, 22.4% pseudophakic and 28.6% phakic. Etiology was trauma (57.1%), previous surgical trauma (28.6%) and congenital aniridia (14.3%). Three months postoperatively, the mean subjective photophobia score improved by 5.2 points (P=.002) and the mean cosmesis score by 4.7 points (P=.001) on a 0 to 10 scale. Mean endothelial cell loss was 16% (P=.001). There was no further statistically significant endothelial cell loss between the 3-month follow-up and the 1-year follow-up visit (P=.320). Elevated intraocular pressure was the main complication (35.7%). Two patients with pre-existing glaucoma required cyclodestructive procedures. The artificial iris was removed in one eye because of chronic pain, elevated intraocular pressure and inflammation that resolved rapidly after removal.

CONCLUSION

Implantation of the customized artificial iris is a very good option because of its outstanding cosmetic result. However, patients with pre-existing glaucoma are not good candidates. Patients should also be warned of possible chronic inflammation necessitating explantation.

Complications of Cosmetic Artificial Iris Implantation and Post Explantation Outcomes

PURPOSE

To report complications of cosmetic artificial iris implantation and explantation outcomes.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

Medical records of 12 patients (24 eyes) who presented to us after being implanted with cosmetic artificial irises elsewhere were reviewed. Data collected included baseline demographics, presenting symptoms, examination findings, and management outcomes.

RESULTS

Eight eyes had NewColorIris implants and 16 had BrightOcular implants. The mean interval from cosmetic iris implantation to presentation was 61.7 ± 60.0 months. The mean follow-up after explantation was 35.5 ± 38.1 months. Complications at presentation included iris abnormalities (11 eyes, 45.8%), elevated intraocular pressure (8 eyes, 33.3%), corneal edema (6 eyes, 25%), intraocular inflammation (5 eyes, 20.8%), and cataract (4 eyes, 16.7%). Surgical interventions included cosmetic iris removal (19 eyes, 79.2%), cataract extraction (7 eyes, 29.2%), corneal transplantation (7 eyes, 29.2%), and glaucoma surgery (4 eyes, 16.7%). Complications at the last follow-up examination included native iris defects (11 eyes, 45.8%), persistent glaucoma (7 eyes, 29.2%), cataract (5 eyes, 20.8%), corneal edema (4 eyes, 16.7%), and intraocular inflammation (2 eyes, 8.3%). The mean logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution was 0.56 ± 0.47 at presentation and 0.78 ± 0.88 at the last examination (P = .30). The mean intraocular pressure was 22.7 ± 15.8 mm Hg at presentation and 13.4 ± 6.99 mm Hg at the last examination (P = .02).

CONCLUSION

Cosmetic iris implantation was associated with serious complications at the time of presentation, and adverse sequelae persisted for years after explantation.

Traumatic Aniridia and Aphakia Management with Iris Reconstruction Lens Using Gore-Tex Sutures, an Ab-Externo Approach

Patient: Male, 55-year-old

Final Diagnosis: Aphakia

Symptoms: Decreased visual acuity • photophobia

Medication:—

Clinical Procedure: Lens implantation • vitrectomy

Specialty: Ophthalmology

Artificial iris exchange

PURPOSE

To describe the indications, motivations, and outcomes of artificial iris exchange.

SETTING

Stein Eye Institute.

DESIGN

Consecutive case series.

METHODS

Review of medical records of patients implanted with an artificial iris device who underwent a subsequent artificial iris exchange.

RESULTS

Five patients were identified: 4 women and 1 man. Their ages ranged from 19 to 58 years at the time of the exchange. One patient had congenital aniridia; the other 4 had acquired iris defects. Three exchanges were simultaneous; 2 were consecutive. Corneal decompensation was the most common indication for the surgery precipitating the exchange. Explanted iris devices included models from Ophtec, Morcher, BrightOcular, and HumanOptics. Replacement models were from Morcher and HumanOptics. Three of the original irides were passively fixated in the capsular bag or ciliary sulcus. All of the replacement irides were suture-fixated to the sclera, either directly or secondarily by way of an intraocular lens. The motivation for the exchange was improved cosmesis in 4 patients and sustained cosmesis in 1 patient. Final visual acuities were 20/25 for 2 patients, 20/100 for 1 patient, and hand motion for 2 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

No 2 iris exchanges were similar. Clinical indications and outcomes varied considerably from patient to patient. A common thread was each patient's motivation to maintain or improve on the functional and cosmetic benefits of having been previously implanted with an artificial iris device. Final visual acuity results were often poor because of the effects of comorbidities, especially glaucoma and corneal decompensation.

Lessons Learned from Implantation of Morcher 50D and 96S Artificial Iris Diaphragms

<b><i>Purpose:</i></b> To discuss problems associated with the implantation of two Morcher iris diaphragm models. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We describe the history, intraoperative complications, and postoperative complications of 5 patients with specific Morcher iris implants. <b><i>Results:</i></b> We implanted Morcher 50D devices in 1 patient and Morcher 96S devices in 4 patients. Complications included postoperative rotation, device mis-sizing, difficult intraoperative rotation, zonular dehiscence, and intraoperative hemorrhage. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Artificial iris implantation has a steep learning curve. With widespread availability on the horizon in the United States, the sharing of surgical experiences is key to achieving the best outcomes for patients.