Comparison of patient outcomes after implantation of Visian toric implantable collamer lens and iris-fixated toric phakic intraocular lens

Meridional analysis for calculation of the toric power of phakic IOLs

PURPOSE

To present a reproducible method to calculate the toricity needed at the intraocular lens (IOL) plane with toric phakic IOLs (ICL, Staar Surgical) and compare its results with those obtained with the online calculator provided by the manufacturer.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

SETTING

Private practice, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

METHODS

The formula originally described by Holladay to calculate the IOL power in phakic eyes was used to calculate the required spherical power along the less refractive meridian and along the more refractive meridian. Meridional analysis was applied to calculate the required toricity at the IOL plane and the surgically induced corneal astigmatism was incorporated into the calculations. The refractive cylinder predicted by this method and by the online calculator of the manufacturer were compared to the postoperative refractive cylinder by means of vector analysis. The possible changes in the ratio of toricity in patients with different amounts of astigmatism and anterior chamber depth are assessed in a theoretical section.

RESULTS

In 35 eyes, the measured mean postoperative refractive cylinder was 0.09 D @ 99°, the mean predicted postoperative refractive astigmatism was 0.04 D @ 102° according to the manufacturer's online calculator and 0.09 D @100° according to our method. With both methods, 91.43% of eyes had an absolute cylinder prediction error within ±0.50 diopters.

CONCLUSIONS

The method described in this article to calculate the toricity of phakic IOLs has a refractive accuracy similar to that of the original calculator developed by the manufacturer.

Comparison of the visual performance of iris-fixated phakic lens and implantable collamer lens to correct high myopia

Background

To compare visual performance between the iris-fixated phakic intraocular len (pIOL) and implantable collamer len (ICL) to correct high myopia.

Methods

Twenty-four eyes underwent iris-fixated pIOL implantation and 24 eyes underwent ICL implantation. At the 6-month follow-up, the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) were compared between the iris-fixated pIOL and ICL groups. The objective scatter index (OSI), modulation transfer function (MTF) cutoff, and ocular aberrations were performed to evaluate postoperative visual quality between the two groups.

Results

No significant difference was found in UDVA, BCVA, and spherical equivalent between the iris-fixated pIOL and ICL groups (P > 0.05). Six months after surgery, the following values were significantly higher in the ICL group than in the iris-fixated pIOL group: MTF cutoff, strehl ratio and optical quality analysis system values at contrasts of 9 %, 20 %, and 100 % (P < 0.01). The OSI in the iris-fixated pIOL group was higher than in the ICL group 6 months after surgery (P < 0.01). All high-order aberrations were slightly more severe in the iris-fixated pIOL group than in the ICL group 6 months after surgery, although only trefoil (P = 0.023) differed significantly in this regard.

Conclusions

Both iris-fixated lenses and ICLs can provide good visual acuity. ICLs confer better visual performance in MTF-associated parameters and induce less intraocular light scattering than iris-fixated pIOLs.

A comparison of visual outcome and rotational stability of two types of toric implantable collamer lenses (TICL) : V4 versus V4c

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and rotational stability after implantation of two types of toric implantable collamer lenses (Toric ICL™(TICL);V4 and V4c, STAAR Surgical Co.).

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated total 48 eyes of 48 patients who underwent the implantation with V4 and V4c TICL with a central hole; A twenty-four eyes of 24 patients with V4 TICL and 24 eyes of 24 patients with V4c TICL with a central hole. Visual acuity, manifest refraction, and intraocular pressure were evaluated before and after surgery. Rotational stability (disparity between the intended axis and achieved axis) was assessed in both groups using digital anterior segment photographs, and vector analysis was also performed.

RESULTS

Uncorrected visual acuity improved in both groups without significant difference (P = .111). There were no statistical differences between two groups in postoperative SE and cylindrical errors (P = .067 and .384, respectively). The mean value of rotation was 4.17±3.31° and 3.39±2.36° in the V4 and V4c TICL groups, respectively without significant difference (P = .364). Vector analysis of astigmatic correction showed no significant diffrence between two groups.

CONCLUSION

V4 and V4c TICL have similar efficacy with regard to visual acuity and refractive outcomes and rotational stability.

Safety and Visual Outcome of Visian Toric ICL Implantation after Corneal Collagen Cross-Linking in Keratoconus: Up to 2 Years of Follow-Up

Purpose. To evaluate the long-term safety and clinical outcome of phakic Visian toric implantable collamer lens (ICL) insertion after corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) in progressive keratoconus. Methods. This was a retrospective study of 30 eyes (19 patients), with progressive keratoconus, who underwent sequential CXL followed by Visian toric ICL implantation after 6 months. Results. At baseline, 6 eyes had stage I, 14 eyes stage II, and 10 eyes stage III keratoconus graded by Amsler-Krumeich classification. At 6 months after CXL, only K (steep) and K (max) decreased significantly from baseline, with no change in visual acuity or refraction. Flattening in keratometric readings was stable thereafter. There was significant improvement in mean uncorrected distance visual acuity (1.57 ± 0.56 to 0.17 ± 0.06 logMAR, P < 0.001) and mean corrected distance visual acuity (0.17 ± 0.08 to 0.11 ± 0.05 logMAR, P < 0.001) at 12 months after ICL implantation that was maintained at the 2-year follow-up. Mean cylinder power and mean spherical equivalent (SE) also decreased significantly after ICL implantation. A small hyperopic shift in SE (+0.25 D) was observed at 2 years that did not alter visual outcomes. Conclusions. Visian toric ICL implantation following CXL is an effective option for improving visual acuity in patients with keratoconus up to 2 years.

Evaluation of the toric implantable collamer lens for simultaneous treatment of myopia and astigmatism

Myopic astigmatism is a prevalent condition that can be treated with spectacles, contact lenses, or laser refractive surgery. However, these treatment options have functional limitations at higher levels of refractive error. The toric implantable collamer lens is designed to treat a broad range of refractive error, generally up to -18 diopters with +1 to +6 diopters of astigmatism. Approval for a more limited treatment range of up to 15 diopters of myopia with +1 to +4 diopters of astigmatism is being sought in the US, where this device has not yet received marketing approval. Surgical correction of high-myopic astigmatism can be life-altering and allow people to participate in activities that were not previously feasible because of visual limitations. The toric implantable collamer lens is implanted behind the iris and in front of the natural crystalline lens. With earlier lens designs, it was necessary to create an iridectomy or iridotomy to prevent pupillary block. The newest toric implantable collamer lens model has a small central hole that is not visually noticeable. This eliminates the need to create a hole in the iris, thereby enhancing the safety of the procedure.

Implantable collamer lens versus iris-fixed phakic intraocular lens implantation to correct myopia: a meta-analysis

This study is a meta-analysis comparing the efficacy, predictability, and safety of correcting myopia via implantation of two types of phakic intraocular lens (PIOLs): the implantable collamer lens (ICL) and iris-fixed PIOL. The Cochrane library, Pubmed, and EMBASE were searched. Study selection, data exclusion, and quality assessment were performed by two independent observers. The pooled relative risk (RR), pooled standardized mean difference (SMD), and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to compare lenses. Seven studies, involving 511 eyes, were included. The pooled SMD in postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) comparing ICLs to iris-fixed PIOLs was −0.22 (95% CI, −0.58 to 0.13; P = .22). The pooled RR values of UDVA of 20/20 or better and of 20/40 or better comparing ICLs to iris-fixed PIOLs were 1.15 (95% CI, 0.89 to 1.47; P = .29) and 1.01 (95% CI, 0.95 to 1.08; P = .75), respectively. The pooled RR of loss of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) and gain in BSCVA comparing ICLs to iris-fixed PIOLs were 1.20 (95% CI, 0.24 to 6.00; P = .82) and 1.14 (95% CI, 0.89 to 1.48; P = .31), respectively. The pooled RR comparing ICLs to iris-fixed PIOLs was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.29 to 2.12; P = .63) for all reported complications and 2.80 (95% CI, 1.04 to 7.52; P = .04) for severe complications. The pooled RR of achieving a result within ±0.5 D (diopter) of the intended target comparing ICLs to iris-fixed PIOLs was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.77; P = .03). Overall, there is no significant difference in efficacy between the two types of PIOLs or in safety, except that the ICL is associated with a greater incidence of severe complications, especially anterior subcapsular cataract, primarily in the Version 2 and Version 3 groups. However, ICL has better predictability.

Toric implantable collamer lens for moderate to high myopic astigmatism: 3-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the 3-year clinical outcomes after toric implantable collamer lens (ICL) implantation for the management of moderate to high myopic astigmatism.

METHODS

Thirty-four eyes of 20 patients who underwent toric ICL implantation were reviewed. All eyes completed 3-year follow-up. Uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance LogMAR visual acuities, refraction, endothelial cell density (ECD), and surgical complications were evaluated. Vectorial analysis of astigmatic correction was also done.

RESULTS

A significant improvement in UDVA, CDVA, manifest spherical and cylindrical refraction was observed at 1 week and remained stable after 3 years. Twenty-six eyes (76.5%) gained lines of CDVA, and two eyes (5.9%) showed a loss of 1 line of CDVA. The spherical equivalent (SE) was within ±0.50 D of emmetropia in 18 eyes (52.9%) and within ±1.00 D in 28 eyes (82.4%). Differences between target-induced astigmatism (TIA) and surgically-induced astigmatism (SIA) were statistically significant (p < 0.01), and a trend to undercorrection of the refractive astigmatism was present after 3 years. The magnitude of flattening effect (FE) was found to be significantly lower than the magnitude of TIA (p < 0.01). The magnitude of the torque vector was always positive, with a value below 0.50 D in all cases. No vision-threatening complications were observed during the follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Toric ICL implantation is an effective and safe surgical option that provides a relatively predictable and stable refractive correction of myopic astigmatism. Further improvements are needed to minimize the degree of undercorrection.