Comparison between using INTEGRA and manual method in determining axis for intraocular lens implantation: Preliminary retrospective study

Comparison of INTEGRA and the Manual Method to Determine the Axis for Intraocular Lens Implantation-A Case Series of 60 Eyes

(1) Background: To compare the results of a new intraoperative contactless device (INTEGRA Optomed, Poland) with the result of a manual method for determining the axis for toric intraocular lens implantation. (2) Material and Methods: This retrospective observational study included 60 eyes of 40 patients (17 men, 23 women) who had toric intraocular lenses implanted. A video recording of each surgery that used the INTEGRA system was made for the analysis. Two researchers then independently assessed the location of the implant axes determined with both digital and manual slit-lamp methods, and compared the results between methods. (3) Results: The implantation axes suggested through the manual and INTEGRA methods were similar. The median axis disparities were 0.0 degrees for both groups. The standard deviation was 0.63 and 0.75 for researcher 1 and 2, respectively. The dominant value was 0.0 in both groups. The INTEGRA axis designation was statistically significantly different from the manual method for researcher 1 (p < 0.05), but it was statistically insignificant for researcher 2 (p = 0.79). (4) Conclusions: The INTEGRA system is a digital ink-free device for image tracking scleral vessels. It was helpful for determining the implantation axis in a precise manner, and the measurements were comparable with those obtained through a manual technique.

Clinical outcomes, predictability and rotational stability following implantation of Eyecryl toric versus TECNIS toric intraocular lenses-A comparative study

PURPOSE

To compare the visual outcomes, predictability and rotational stability following implantation of Eyecryl toric versus TECNIS toric intraocular lenses.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 100 eyes of 78 eligible patients who underwent phacoemulsification followed by implantation of either Eyecryl Toric IOL or TECNIS Toric IOL (n = 50 eyes in each group), using an intraoperative image-guided marker less system. All toric IOL implantations were performed under balanced salt solution. At 2 weeks, 3 months and 6 months, uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), spherical equivalent refraction, residual astigmatism, and rotational stability of the toric IOL was evaluated and compared. Rotational stability was assessed using ray tracing.

RESULTS

Mean age of the participants was 67.8 ± 9.26 years in Eyecryl toric group and 64 ± 11 years in TECNIS toric group. The mean pre-op corneal astigmatism was 1.75 ± 0.62 D and 2.00 ± 0.71 D in the Eyecryl and TECNIS group, respectively (p = 0.07). At 2 weeks and at 6 months post-op, there was no statistically significant difference between the UDVA, CDVA, and residual astigmatism between the two groups (p < 0.05). Mean post-operative toric IOL rotation was 3.94 ± 2.27 degrees in the Eyecryl Toric group, and 4.44 ± 2.77 degrees, in the TECNIS Toric group, respectively, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.32). One IOL in the Eyecryl group and two IOLs in the TECNIS group required re-positioning for significant post-op rotation at 1 week post-op.

CONCLUSION

At 6 months, both Eyecryl toric and TECNIS toric IOLs showed comparable post-operative outcomes in terms of UDVA, CDVA, residual astigmatism and rotational stability.

Clinical outcomes and rotational stability following implantation of Eyecryl toric intraocular lens - Results of a 12-months prospective study

Purpose:

To evaluate the clinical performance and rotational stability after implantation of Eyecryl Toric monofocal IOL following cataract surgery.

Methods:

Patients undergoing phacoemulsification for age-related cataract and satisfying the eligibility criteria were implanted with Eyecryl Toric IOL. All implantations were done under balanced salt solution. A marker-less system Callisto Eye (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Germany) was used to guide the intra-operative alignment of the toric IOL.

Results:

A total of 50 eyes from 39 patients with mean age of 68.2 ± 8.7 years were included in the study. At 12 months, 82% (41) eyes had cumulative UDVA of 20/20 or better. Post-op SE refraction accuracy was within ± 0.50 D for 94% (n = 47) eyes and refractive cylinder accuracy was within ≤0.50 D in 98% (n = 49) eyes. Average post-op rotation at 1 year was 4.06 ± 2.15 degrees. Eighty-four percent of eyes were within 5 degrees and 16% were within 6-10 degrees of intended axis. Two eyes required IOL re-positioning due to significant rotation of the toric IOL (>10 degrees), identified within the 1^st week after surgery.

Conclusion:

Eyecryl toric IOL demonstrated the ability to achieve a significant reduction in astigmatism, improved UDVA outcomes, high levels of spectacle independence, low rates of intra-operative injector related complications and good rotational stability at 12 months post-op.