Évaluation d’une nouvelle plateforme d’implant intraoculaire : centrage et stabilité rotatoire

Early Postoperative Rotational stability and its related factors of a single-piece acrylic toric intraocular lens

Purpose

In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the early postoperative rotational stability of TECNIS toric intraocular lens (IOL) and analyse its correlation with preoperative and intraoperative parameters.

Methods

A total of 102 eyes from 87 cataract patients who underwent implantation of TECNIS toric IOL during July 2016 to November 2017 were enrolled in this retrospective study. Preoperative parameters including corneal astigmatism, axial length (AL), lens thickness (LT), anterior chamber depth (ACD) and sulcus-to-sulcus (STS), were determined. The area of capsulorhexis was measured with Rhinoceros 5.0 software. The follow-up examinations including the residual astigmatism (RAS) and postoperative toric IOL axis, were performed at 1 month and 3 months after surgery.

Results

RAS was −0.84 ± 0.88 D at 1 month and −0.81 ± 0.89 D at 3 months after surgery. The rotation of toric IOL at 3 months was 4.83 ± 3.65°. The Pearson’s r of ACD, horizontal and vertical STS, and toric IOL target axis was 0.011, 0.039, 0.045 and 0.082. The toric IOL rotation was positively correlated with the area of capsulorhexis (r = 0.522, P = 0.0003), LT (r = 0.288, P = 0.003) and AL (r = 0.259, P = 0.009). As for the area of capsulorhexis, the regressive equation was: y = 0.682 × −13.105, demonstrating that the diameter of capsulorhexis should be controlled within 5.8 mm to maintain the toric IOL rotation within 5.0°.

Conclusions

TECNIS toric IOLs possessed great early postoperative rotational stability. The area of capsulorhexis, AL and LT were positively correlated with postoperative rotational stability. A capsulorhexis within 5.8 mm had an important significance in improving rotational stability.

[Posterior capsule opacification, glistenings and visual outcomes: 3 years after implantation of a new hydrophobic IOL]

PURPOSE

To evaluate the visual outcomes, the incidence of glistenings and posterior capsule opacification in a series of consecutive eyes with a new blue light-filtering hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lens (IOL) SETTING: Service d'ophtalmologie, clinique Beausoleil, avenue de Lodève, Montpellier.

DESIGN

Retrospective, cross-sectional study.

METHODS

This study included a series of 66 eyes that underwent routine cataract surgery with PODEye (PhysIOL SA, Liège, Belgium) monofocal IOL implantation between May 2011 and November 2011. These eyes were compared for glistenings with patients implanted with Acrysof material IOL (Alcon, Fort Worth, USA) who had a routine postoperative examination between January 2015 and August 2015. The safety of the IOL was assessed by visual acuity outcomes, as well as rotational stability, centration and postoperative medication. The incidence and severity of glistenings were evaluated with the slit lamp. Glistenings and PCO were graded subjectively (0=absent; 1=moderate; 2=dense). Follow-up was 3 years.

RESULTS

The mean visual acuity after PODEye implantation was 0.98±0.05 (n=50) in decimal notation at 1 year, 0.98±0.06 at 1 week, (n=66), 1.00±0.01 at 3 weeks (n=64) and 0.99±0.02 at 3 months (n=59). The IOL displayed stable positioning in all axes. Glistenings of grade 2 were absent in the G-Free/PODEye group, whereas they were significantly present in the Acrysof group. One out of 43 eyes at 3-year follow-up underwent YAG capulotomy at 37 months. Sixty-six percent of eyes had no PCO (grade 0) at 3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The PODEye IOL was safe and stable. Glistenings grade 2 or more were not found with this blue light-filtering hydrophobic acrylic IOL. PCO occurrence was low at three years.

Stability of a Novel Intraocular Lens Design: Comparison of Two Trifocal Lenses

PURPOSE

To compare visual outcomes, rotational stability, and centration in a randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing cataract surgery who were bilaterally implanted with two different trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with a similar optical zone but different haptic shape.

METHODS

Twenty-one patients (42 eyes) with cataract and less than 1.50 D of corneal astigmatism underwent implantation of one FineVision/MicoF IOL in one eye and one POD FineVision IOL in the contralateral eye (PhysIOL, Liège, Belgium) at IOA Madrid Innova Ocular, Madrid, Spain. IOL allocation was random. Outcome measures, all evaluated 3 months postoperatively, included monocular and binocular uncorrected distance (UDVA), corrected distance (CDVA), distance-corrected intermediate (DCIVA), and near (DCNVA) visual acuity (at 80, 40, and 25 cm) under photopic conditions, refraction, IOL centration, haptic rotation, dysphotopsia, objective quality of vision and aberration quantification, patient satisfaction, and spectacle independence.

RESULTS

Three months postoperatively, mean monocular UDVA, CDVA, DCIVA, and DCNVA (40 cm) under photopic conditions were 0.04 ± 0.07, 0.01 ± 0.04, 0.15 ± 0.11, and 0.16 ± 0.08 logMAR for the eyes implanted with the POD FineVision IOL and 0.03 ± 0.05, 0.01 ± 0.02, 0.17 ± 0.12, and 0.14 ± 0.08 logMAR for those receiving the FineVision/MicroF IOL. Moreover, the POD FineVision IOL showed similar centration (P> .05) and better rotational stability (P < .05) than the FineVision/MicroF IOL. Regarding halos, there was a minimal but statistically significant difference, obtaining better results with FineVision/MicroF. Full spectacle independence was reported by all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed similar visual outcomes for both trifocal IOLs under test (POD FineVision and FineVision/MicroF). However, the POD FineVision IOL showed better rotational stability, as afforded by its design. [J Refract Surg. 2016;32(6):394-402.].