Comparative evaluation of re-use or replacement of dislocated 3-piece intraocular lenses with a scleral fixation technique

Bilaterally subluxed diffractive intraocular lenses: big expectations and even bigger comorbidities

A 78-year-old woman with an ocular history of cataract surgery with a diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) in each eye has developed fluctuating vision, greater in the right eye than the left eye, after 4 years. She has a history of inactive central serous retinopathy and a vision potential of 20/25 + 2 in the right eye and 20/25 in the left eye. She has well-controlled diabetes, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia. She has enjoyed her spectacle independence for some time and wishes to have her vision restored. On examination, her uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was 20/50 in the right eye and 20/25 in the left eye and her uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) was J3 in the right eye and J1 in the left eye. Intraocular pressures (IOPs) measured 22 mm Hg in the right eye and 18 mm Hg in the left eye. Pupils had limited reactivity with irregularity in the right eye but no obvious relative afferent pupillary defect. Motility and confrontation visual fields were unremarkable in both eyes. Retinal acuity meter was 20/20 in both eyes, and manifest refraction was plano -1.25 × 105 20/40, J3 in the right eye and +0.50 × 20/25, J1 in the left eye. Pertinent findings on slitlamp examination included temporal iris atrophy and transillumination defects greater in the right eye than the left eye, peripupillary pseudoexfoliative changes in both eyes, significant inferior subluxation of a diffractive 3-piece posterior chamber IOL in the capsular bag with lens-pitting peripherally and few central, moderate pseudophacodonesis, and an open posterior capsule in the right eye. In the left eye, she had mild inferior subluxation of a single-piece acrylic diffractive IOL in the capsular bag with moderate pseudophacodonesis and an open posterior capsule (Figure 1JOURNAL/jcrs/04.03/02158034-202403000-00019/figure1/v/2024-02-20T193212Z/r/image-tiff). All other anterior segment findings were unremarkable. On dilated posterior examination, she had a cup-to-disc ratio of 0.50 in the right eye and 0.65 in the left eye without edema hemorrhage or pallor. There were attenuated vessels in both eyes, posterior vitreous detachment in both eyes, and a few small drusen peripherally in both eyes. There was retinal pigment epithelium irregularity and dropout parafoveal in the right eye and subfoveal in the left eye (Figure 2). There was no evidence of macular edema, subretinal fluid, choroidal thickening, or neovascular membranes. The periphery was unremarkable in both eyes.JOURNAL/jcrs/04.03/02158034-202403000-00019/figure2/v/2024-02-20T193212Z/r/image-tiff What testing would you obtain preoperatively to help guide your decision-making? How would you counsel the patient regarding comorbid conditions and expectations?

Outcomes of three surgical approaches for managing ectopia lentis in Marfan syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical outcomes of three surgical approaches for ectopia lentis in Marfan syndrome (MS) patients who had undergone crystalline lens removal with posterior chamber intraocular lens (IOL) implantation techniques comprising the intrascleral fixation of IOL, sutured scleral fixation of IOL, and IOL implantation with the use of a Cionni capsular tension ring (CTR).

METHODS

This is a retrospective comparative study, including 35 eyes of 21 patients who underwent the intrascleral fixation of IOL (group 1), scleral IOL fixation with the Z-suture (group 2), and IOL implantation with the use of a Cionni CTR (group 3) following crystalline lens removal. The surgical indications were as follows: no improvement in visual function after eyeglasses or contact lens application due to excessive irregular astigmatism and advanced crystalline lens decentration in which the edge of the crystalline lens came up to the optical axis, or dislocation of the crystalline lens resulting in aphakia and secondary glaucoma due to lens dislocation. The surgical outcomes and complications due to surgery were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients in the study was 12.3 ± 8.7 years (5-32 years). There were 10 eyes in group 1, 13 eyes in group 2, and 12 eyes in group 3. Visual acuity improved significantly in each group after surgery. Ocular residual astigmatism did not differ significantly between the groups (p = 0.51).

CONCLUSION

There were no significant differences between the three surgical approaches in the current study in terms of the postoperative results and complications.

Long-term surgical outcomes of primary retropupillary iris claw intraocular lens implantation for the treatment of intraocular lens dislocation

We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of primary retropupillary iris claw intraocular lens (R-IOL) implantation in patients with complete intraocular lens (IOL) dislocation. In this single-center retrospective case series, we reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent R-IOL implantation surgery with pars plana vitrectomy for the treatment of IOL dislocation between September 2014 and July 2019. The primary outcome was change in visual acuity (VA) up to 24 months postoperatively. The secondary outcomes included changes in intraocular pressure (IOP), refractive errors, and endothelial cell count (ECC) over the same period. Data of 103 eyes (98 patients) were analyzed. The mean uncorrected VA was significantly improved at one month postoperatively (− 0.69 logMAR, P < 0.001), compared to the preoperative value. IOP (− 2.3 mmHg, P = 0.008) and ECC (− 333.4 cells/mm², P = 0.027) significantly decreased one month post-surgery and remained stable thereafter. Postoperative mean spherical equivalents were similar to the prediction error throughout the follow-up period. IOP elevation (n = 8, 7.8%), cystoid macular edema (n = 4, 3.9%), and dislocation of the R-IOL (n = 10, 9.7%) were managed successfully. Overall, primary R-IOL implantation with pars plana vitrectomy is effective and safe for correcting IOL dislocation due to various causes.