Management of Cataract in Patients with Irregular Astigmatism with Regular Central Component by Phacoemulsification Combined with Toric Intraocular Lens Implantation

Repeatability and Agreement of 4 Biometers Measuring Corneal Astigmatism in Eyes With Irregular Corneal Astigmatism Component

PURPOSE

To investigate the repeatability and agreement of corneal astigmatism measurements in eyes with irregular corneal astigmatism component (ICAC) using four devices: IOLMaster 700 biometer, Lenstar 900 biometer, iTrace, and Pentacam.

DESIGN

Prospective cross-sectional reliability analysis.

METHODS

Sixty-four eyes (52 patients) with ICAC were examined three times using the four devices. The eye with ICAC in this study is defined as the cornea has a certain degree of irregular astigmatism (asymmetric and/or skewed bowtie pattern of corneal topography according to corneal topography classification), accompanied with total corneal higher-order aberrations in the 4 mm zone of 0.3 µm or greater. Corneal astigmatism was evaluated using three categories: anterior corneal astigmatism (ACA), posterior corneal astigmatism, and total corneal astigmatism (TCA). The repeatability was determined using the ∆Ast (arithmetic mean of vector differences among three repeated corneal astigmatism measurements). Bland-Altman plots and astigmatism vector analyses were employed to assess agreement.

RESULTS

The IOLMaster 700 (∆Ast = 0.27 ± 0.20 D) showcased higher repeatability in ACA measurements compared to iTrace (∆Ast = 0.37 ± 0.38 D, P = .040) and Pentacam (∆Ast = 0.50 ± 0.22 D, P < .001), and paralleled the performance of Lenstar 900 (∆Ast = 0.31 ± 0.26 D, P = .338). The Pentacam (∆Ast = 0.09 ± 0.07 D, P < .001) demonstrated superior repeatability in posterior corneal astigmatism, whereas the IOLMaster 700 (∆Ast = 0.33 ± 0.23 D, P < .001) excelled in TCA. The IOLMaster 700 exhibited good agreement with either Lenstar 900 or iTrace, characterized by narrow 95% limits of agreement and clinically acceptable vector differences. Conversely, vector differences between Pentacam and the other three devices in ACA and TCA measurements were clinically significant, exceeding 0.50 D (all P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of repeatability of corneal astigmatism measurements in eyes with ICAC, the IOLMaster 700 and Lenstar 900 outperformed iTrace and Pentacam. While the IOLMaster 700 can be used interchangeably with either Lenstar 900 or iTrace, the Pentacam is not interchangeable with the other three devices.

Effectiveness of toric intraocular lens implantation for correcting irregular corneal astigmatism in cataract eyes

A retrospective cohort study was conducted to observe the correction effect of Toric intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in cataract eyes with specific types of irregular corneal astigmatism. Thirty-four eyes with either the "asymmetric bow-tie" pattern (Type I) or the "angled bow-tie" pattern (Type II) were included. Corneal topography was assessed using Pentacam HR, and changes in preoperative corneal astigmatism, visual acuity, manifest refraction, and objective visual quality were measured and compared. The average uncorrected distance visual acuity improved significantly from 0.86 ± 0.40 logMAR to 0.22 ± 0.15 logMAR (P < 0.001). Preoperative corneal astigmatism of 2.05 ± 0.90 D was corrected to a postoperative residual astigmatism of 0.78 ± 0.57 D (P < 0.001), with 32% of eyes within 0.50 D. The residual astigmatism prediction errors in Type I and Type II cases were (0.97 ± 0.68 D) and (0.66 ± 0.37 D), respectively (P = 0.100). The mean spherical equivalent prediction error in Type II cases (0.07 ± 0.36 D) was significantly smaller than that in Type I cases (- 0.29 ± 0.52 D) (P = 0.030). This study concludes that Toric IOL implantation effectively corrects specific types of irregular corneal astigmatism in cataract surgery. Eyes with the "angled bow-tie" pattern show higher accuracy in refractive predictions compared to eyes with the "asymmetric bow-tie" pattern.

Supplemental Toric Intraocular Lenses in the Ciliary Sulcus for Correction of Residual Refractive Astigmatism: A Review

PURPOSE

This study conducted a critical review of the peer-reviewed literature on the use of supplemental toric intraocular lenses (STIOL) in the ciliary sulcus to correct residual refractive astigmatism.

METHODS

This review used PubMed as a database from 1 January 2010 to 13 March 2023. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria defined, 14 articles were selected for the current review.

RESULTS

The data of 155 eyes were analyzed. Most of the studies reviewed had a short follow-up and poor or limited design, including case reports, case series, and retrospective cohorts. The follow-up period ranged from 43 days to 4.5 years. STIOL rotation was the most frequently described complication in the literature, with a mean rotation of 30.48 ± 19.90°. These patients required repositioning in 50 of 155 eyes (32.25%). Moreover, four eyes (2.58%) required scleral fixation sutures and two eyes (1.29%) iris fixation. Other complications were high intraocular pressure (3 eyes, 1.93%), transient corneal edema (2 eyes, 1.29%), corneal decompensation (2 eyes, 1.29%), and pigment dispersion (1 eye, 0.64%). From the total, 57.41% of eyes (89 eyes from 155) achieved within ± 0.50D of target refractive astigmatism. It is important to highlight that at least 52 eyes out of the 155 (33.54%) had an abnormal cornea with irregular astigmatism.

CONCLUSION

STIOL seem to offer good visual and refractive outcomes. However, STIOL showed variable rotational stability, especially in some platforms. Further studies with a more robust design, methodology, and standardized analysis methods are needed to confirm these trends.

Cataract surgery in patients with underlying keratoconus: focused review

An underlying diagnosis of keratoconus (KC) can complicate cataract surgery. In this study, the results of a focused review of the literature pertaining to cataract surgery in patients with KC are detailed. Topics essential for the appropriate management of this patient population are discussed. First, the individual and shared epidemiology and pathophysiology of cataract and KC are reviewed. Then, the theory and approach to intraocular lens power calculation are discussed, highlighting particularities and pitfalls of this exercise when performed in patients with KC. Finally, several special-although not uncommon-management scenarios and questions are addressed, such as surgical planning in cases where corneal stabilization or tissue replacement interventions are also necessitated.

[The impact of the position of toric intraocular lenses on the functional outcomes of phaco surgery]

The article reviews data on the impact of the position (orientation) of toric intraocular lenses on the functional outcomes of cataract phacoemulsification surgery, discusses the algorithm of astigmatism correction with intraocular lenses including preoperative determination of the size and position of main meridians, calculation of lens parameters, marking of corneal meridians, intraoperative positioning, as well as rotation and/or repositioning of the lens when necessary.

Spotlight on the Corneal Back Surface Astigmatism: A Review

Recent evidence indicates that the corneal back surface astigmatism (CBSA) contributes to the refractive state of the eye in cataract surgery, especially with the implantation of toric intraocular lenses. But this has been met with some scepticism. A review of key studies performed over the past three decades shows that the mean CBSA power ranges from 0.18(±0.16)D to 1.04(±0.20)D. The clinical assessment of CBSA is problematic. There is poor agreement between the current automated systems for assessment of CBSA and it is assumed that these systems directly measure the CBSA. But CBSA cannot be measured directly in vivo. A historical review of methods used to quantify the curvature of the posterior corneal surface reveals that CBSA estimated by current systems is based on values for corneal front surface astigmatism, corneal refractive index, central corneal thickness, corneal thickness at peripheral locations and the exact distance between the corneal apex and each one of these peripheral locations. Doubts and errors in these values, coupled with the precise details of the algorithm incorporated to estimate CBSA, are the likely sources of the lack of agreement between current systems. These systematic errors cloud the assessment of CBSA. Mean CBSA may be low, but it varies from case to case. There is a clear need for a realistic, practical procedure for clinicians to independently calibrate systems for estimating CBSA. This would help to reduce uncertainty and the discrepancies between instruments designed to measure the same parameter.

[Fixation of an intraocular lens using reverse optic capture with haptic tuck for intraoperative posterior capsule rupture]

Exact positioning and optimal axial alignment are mandatory to achieve satisfactory postoperative refractive results after implantation of a toric or presbyopia correcting intraocular lens (IOL). Posterior capsule rupture can preclude stable capsular fixation. In such cases, reverse optic capture with haptic tuck results in stable fixation of the lens with respect to centering, rotation and axial position. Only the haptics are positioned in the capsule, behind the anterior capsulorrhexis. The optic remains in the sulcus; thus, the lens is fixed in the rhexis, providing long-term stability despite the presence of posterior capsule rupture.

Handling regular and irregular astigmatism during cataract surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There are several different approaches to handling regular and irregular astigmatism during cataract surgery, but still much debate on which solutions are most effective given unique patient circumstances. In this review, we examine recent literature and studies to highlight some of the most effective ways to plan preoperatively, manage regular and irregular astigmatism during cataract surgery, as well as managing postoperative complications.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent developments in technology have provided increased courses of action for astigmatism management during cataract surgery. Additional options of toric IOLs with presbyopic platforms, light adjustable lenses, intraocular pinhole lenses, online technological tools and platforms, wavefront or topographic laser technology, and phototherapeutic keratectomy are all effective solutions to managing regular and irregular astigmatism. In this review, we will explore optimal approaches for unique situations.

SUMMARY

With increased technology, research, and methods, correcting regular and irregular astigmatism during cataract surgery is achievable in most patients. With in-depth preoperative planning, analysis of patient-specific factors, and a tailored approach, surgeons can obtain excellent uncorrected vision for patients.

The Impact of Changes in Corneal Back Surface Astigmatism on the Residual Astigmatic Refractive Error following Routine Uncomplicated Phacoemulsification

Purpose

To determine the significance of any association between intersessional changes in ocular residual astigmatism (RA) and astigmatism at corneal front (FSA) and back (BSA) surfaces following uneventful routine phacoemulsification.

Methods

Astigmatism was evaluated by autorefractometry and subjective refraction and at both the corneal surfaces with Orbscan II™ (Bausch & Lomb) over central 3 mm and 5 mm optical zones at 1, 2, and 3 months after routine phacoemulsification in 103 patients implanted with monofocal nontoric intraocular lenses (IOLs, one eye/patient). Data were subjected to vector analysis to determine the actual change (Δ) in astigmatism (power and axis) for the refractive and Orbscan II findings.

Results

The number of cases that attended where ΔRA was ≥0.50 DC between 1 and 2 months was 52 by autorefractometry and 36 by subjective refraction and between 2 and 3 months was 24 by autorefractometry and 19 by subjective refraction. Vector analysis revealed significant correlations between ΔFSA and ΔRA for data obtained by autorefractometry but not by subjective refraction. At all times, ΔBSA was greater than ΔFSA (p < 0.01). Key findings for ΔBSA values over the central 3 mm zone were between (A) the sine of the axis of ΔRA (y) and sine of the axis of ΔBSA (x) for the data obtained by autorefractometry (between 1 and 2 months, y = 0.749 - 0.303x, r = 0.299, n = 52, p=0.031) and subjective refraction (between 2 and 3 months, y = 0.6614 - 0.4755x, r = 0.474, n = 19, p=0.040) and (B) ΔRA (y) and ΔBSA (x) powers between 2 and 3 months postoperatively for the data obtained by autorefractometry (ΔRA = 0.118 ΔBSA + 0.681 r = 0.467, n = 24, p=0.021) and subjective refraction (ΔRA = 0.072 ΔBSA + 0.545 r = 0.510, n = 19, p=0.026).

Conclusion

Changes in the ocular residual refractive astigmatic error after implanting a monofocal nontoric IOL are associated with changes in astigmatism at the back surface of the cornea within the central optical zone.