Artiflex versus STAAR implantable contact lenses for correction of high myopia

Evaluation of Visual Outcome of 2 Phakic Posterior Chamber Implantable Lenses in High Myopia: A Comparative Study

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the visual outcomes of two phakic intraocular lenses in high myopia.

METHODS

A prospective comparative study was undertaken on 50 eyes of 26 patients {age ≥21 years and divided into two groups (implantable collamer lens [ICL] V4c, n=25 eyes and refractive implantable lens [RIL], n=25 eyes)}. Patients were evaluated for uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCVA), best-corrected distance visual acuity, manifest refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE), contrast sensitivity, intraocular pressure, dilated fundus examination, trabecular-iris angle (TIA), anterior chamber depth, horizontal white-to-white diameter, wavefront aberrometry, and endothelial cell (EC) count. All patients were followed up until 6 months and additionally evaluated for anterior chamber inflammation, cataract, and lens vault.

RESULTS

The baseline parameters (UCVA, MRSE, and EC count) and postoperative improvement in UCVA, contrast sensitivity, MRSE, EC loss, safety index, and efficacy index were comparable between both the lenses. The improvement in aberrometric profile was significantly better in the ICL group. The mean postoperative vault was higher in RIL group (434.88±162.48 μm vs. 547.24±159.83 μm, P=0.0173); however, the vault was within normal range in both the groups. The decrease in mean TIA was significantly higher in RIL group (8.58 vs. 13.45 μm, P=0.0073).

CONCLUSION

Acrylic phakic lens can be considered as a suitable alternative to collamer lens for refractive correction of high myopia. The collamer lenses showed slight superiority in some qualitative visual parameters; however, collamer lenses do not present with subjective complaints in the patients.

Visian® ICLV4c™ and Artiflex®: Comparative Analysis with the HD AnalyserTM and Integration with Subjective Performance and Anatomical Parameters

Purpose

To analyze and compare the mid-term objective and subjective performance of two phakic intraocular lenses (PIOLs) – Visian^® ICL™ V4c and Artiflex^® and to correlate those results with anatomical parameters.

Patients and Methods

Observational retrospective study including thirty patients (15 for each PIOL) randomly selected from those who underwent bilateral implantation of one of the PIOLs (60 eyes were analysed). Uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuities (UDVA and CDVA), anterior chamber structural parameters, and corneal endothelial cells density and morphology were evaluated. Quality of vision was assessed both subjectively with a questionnaire, and objectively using a double-pass technology optical quality analysis system.

Results

At the end of follow-up the Artiflex^® group showed better UDVA (0.95±0.11 vs 0.99±0.05, p=0.027) and higher proportion of eyes reaching at least 20/20 (28/30 vs 18/30, p=0.005). Excellent and similar objective scatter index (1.79±0.9 vs 2.14±1.6, p=0.306) and modular transfer function cutoff frequency (26.91±9.2 vs 26.51±11.9, p=0.784) results were achieved in the HD Analyzer^® and the questionnaire showed comparable high Satisfaction (55.7±3.5 vs 54.3±5.4, p=0.386) and low Dysphotopsia Scores (3.1±1.8 vs 2.1±2.2, p=0.213). The ICL group showed inferior anterior chamber volume (p<0.001), and angle (p<0.001) and superior pupillary diameter (p=0.007). Minimum follow-up was 24 months.

Conclusion

Both the Visian^® ICLV4c™ and the Artiflex^® showed excellent optical performance through the HD Analyzer^TM technology, translated in high patient satisfaction. Overall, both PIOLs showed similar safety, predictability, stability and effectiveness of for the reduction of high sphero-cylindrical refractive errors, despite better UDVA results with the Artiflex^®.

Comparison of Toric Implantable Collamer Lens and Toric Artiflex Phakic IOLs in Terms of Visual Outcome: a Paired Contralateral Eye Study

PURPOSE

This study sought to compare the postoperative visual outcomes of toric implantable collamer lens (T-ICL) with toric Artiflex (T-Artiflex) lenses.

DESIGN

Alternating treatment, contralateral eye matched clinical study.

METHODS

This study compared 82 eyes of 41 patients with T-ICL lenses in one eye and toric Artiflex implantation in the contralateral eye to correct myopic astigmatism. Safety, efficacy, predictability, astigmatic vector changes, contrast sensitivity, endothelial cell count, and possible adverse events were assessed at least 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

After a mean follow-up of 12 months, the safety index was mean 1.40 ± 0.70 in the T-ICL group and 1.20 ± 0.21 in the T-Artiflex group. Furthermore, their mean efficacy indexes were 1.24 ± 0.42 and 1.08 ± 0.23, respectively (P = .029). A total of 39 eyes (95%) in the T-ICL group and 41 eyes (100%) in the T-Artiflex group were within ±1.00 diopter (D) of emmetropia and 33 eyes (80%) and 34 eyes (83%) were within ±0.5 D of emmetropia, respectively. Vector analysis revealed mean index of success as large as 0.25 ± 0.22 in the T-ICL group and 0.24 ± 0.15 in the T-Artiflex group. Postoperative contrast sensitivities were equal in both groups under mesopic conditions for any given spatial frequency. There was an endothelial loss of 2.18% and 1.95% in the T-ICL and T-Artiflex groups, respectively. There were no significant complications in any of the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both lenses showed promising results in terms of safety, efficacy, and predictability for correction of myopic astigmatism. As shown in this paired-eye study, most outcomes were almost identical, and neither of these lenses were clinically superior to the other.

Artiflex foldable lens for myopia correction results of 10 years of follow-up

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of the Artiflex® lens implant and to follow the evolution of the number of corneal endothelial cells over time.

DESIGN

It was a retrospective study of an observational case series of patients who underwent surgery at "The INVISION Ophthalmic Hospital" (Almería, Spain) in 2007 and who were followed for 10 years.

METHODS

Setting: Clinical practice. Study population included 53 eyes of 30 patients who underwent an Artiflex® lens implant for the correction of myopia from -4 to -14 D. Each patient included in this study had stable myopia for at least 2 years and a contraindication for corneal refractive surgery. The efficacy index was defined as the quotient between uncorrected distance visual acuity postoperative and best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA) preoperative. The safety index was calculated as the quotient between BCDVA postop and BCDVA preop.

RESULTS

The average efficacy and safety indices of the lenses implanted were 1.1 (SD 0.30) and 1.06 (SD 0.2) at 10 years of follow-up. In this period of time there has been a loss of 12% of the corneal endothelial cells. The postoperative complications were pigment dispersion in four eyes (7%) of four patients and decentration of phakic intraocular lens in two eyes (4%) of another two patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The Artiflex® foldable phakic lens could be a safe and effective long-term alternative for myopic patients in whom laser surgery was contraindicated.

V4B implantable collamer lens versus Intacs corneal rings to manage anisometropic myopic amblyopia in children

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and efficacy of phakic intraocular lens (PIOL) versus intrastromal corneal ring segments (Intacs), for correcting high myopic anisometropia in amblyopic children.

DESIGN

Nonrandomized prospective multi-center study.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty children, aged between 4 and 12 years, with unilateral high myopic anisometropic amblyopia were included in this study.

METHODS

Patients who were prospectively subdivided into group A, with mean preoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) of -12.96 ± 4.17 D, underwent unilateral phakic posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation. Patients with mean preoperative MRSE of -8.60 ± 1.16 D in group B were treated by Intacs corneal rings. Pre- and postoperative visual acuity, ocular examination, stereoacuity, axial biometry measurements, cycloplegic refraction, and endothelial cell counts were performed in all patients.

RESULTS

Group A revealed prevention of amblyopia with improvement in spectacle-corrected distance visual acuity, where 4-6 lines were achieved in 77% of children, 2-3 lines in 4%, and just 0-1 lines restricted to 19% of children. Improvement in stereoacuity was noted in 93.33% of group A cases, whereas group B showed fewer cases of successfully improved vision, with 4-6 lines in 70% of children, 2-3 lines in 3%, and just 0-1 lines restricted to 27% of children. Improvement in stereoacuity was noted in 86.66% of cases. Two cases of cataract and 1 case of glaucoma with 1 case of uveitis were noted in the implantable contact lens (ICL) group.

CONCLUSIONS

Posterior chamber PIOLs or Intacs may provide a safe alternative in treating anisometropic myopic patients. Intacs implantation is safer with fewer complications than ICL. However, ICL implantation is advantageous over the corneal ring segment procedure owing to the wide range of errors to correct.

Phakic Intraocular Lenses and their Special Indications

Phakic intraocular lenses revolutionize refractive surgery and continue to serve as an excellent option for vision correction in patients who are not ideal candidates for laser vision correction. This article will review special indications of phakic intraocular lenses in the clinical practice.

Comparison of three phakic intraocular lenses for correction of myopia

Purpose:

To compare the visual outcomes and complications of three different types of phakic intraocular lenses (PIOLs), for correction of moderate to high myopia.

Methods:

We reviewed 112 myopic eyes undergoing PIOL implantation using Artisan (40 eyes), Artiflex (36 eyes), and implantable collamer lens (ICL, 36 eyes). Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), pachymetry, corneal endothelial cell (CEC) loss, and higher order aberrations (HOA) were compared.

Results:

Mean follow-up period was 30 ± 11 months. Preoperatively, spherical equivalent (SE) refractive error was −11.6 ± 3.7, −9.59 ± 1.97, and −12.3 ± 4.8 D in the Artisan, Artiflex and ICL groups, respectively. SE was comparable among the study groups at final follow-up (P = 0.237). Mean astigmatic reduction was 0.31 ± 0.72, 0.45 ± 0.62, and 0.0 ± 0.57 in the Artisan, Artiflex and ICL groups, respectively (P = 0.007). Emmetropia (±1 D) was achieved in 60%, 91.7% and 77.8% of eyes in the Artisan, Artiflex and ICL groups, respectively, the difference was significant between the Artisan and Artiflex groups (P = 0.017). BCVA improvement more than one line occurred in 25%, 19.4% and 38.9% of eyes (P = 0.158); pachymetric changes were minimal with no difference among the three groups (P = 0.754), and mean CEC loss was 10 ± 9%, 9 ± 6% and 9 ± 10% in the Artisan, Artiflex and ICL groups, respectively (P = 0.694). HOAs (P = 0.039), vertical trefoil (P = 0.032) and spherical aberration (P = 0.001) were higher with Artisan group as compared to ICL. Total aberrations (P = 0.028) and spherical aberration (P = 0.001) was also higher with Artisan group as compared to Artiflex.

Conclusion:

Visual and refractive outcomes were comparable with Artisan, Artiflex and ICL. In terms of HOAs and quality of vision, ICL and Artiflex seem to be better choices in highly myopic eyes.

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.

Comparison of the visual outcomes between PRK-MMC and phakic IOL implantation in high myopic patients

PURPOSE

To compare the visual outcomes between PRK-MMC and phakic IOL in patients with more than 8 diopter (D) of myopia.

METHODS

This comparative study was performed on 23 eyes under treatment with Artiflex (group A) and 23 eyes under treatment with PRK-MMC (group B). Artiflex phakic IOL (Ophtec BV) was used in group A, and the VISX STAR S4 Excimer Laser (Abbott) was used for PRK-MMC in group B.

RESULTS

The safety index was 1.11 ± 0.23 and 1.05 ± 0.25 (P = 0.100) and the efficacy index was 1.02 ± 0.11 and 0.98 ± 0.10 (P = 0.266) in group A and B, respectively. At 1 year after surgery, the manifest refraction spherical equivalent was -0.17 ± 1.18 and -0.25 ± 0.18 D in group A and B, respectively (P = 0.471). Mesopic CS showed no significant difference between the two groups in any spatial frequency. Total coma was 0.24 ± 0.17 and 0.67 ± 0.40 μm (P < 0.001), spherical aberration was -0.11 ± 0.11 and 0.41 ± 0.18 μm (P < 0.001), and RMS HOAT was 0.50 ± 0.20 and 0.96 ± 0.45 μm (P<0.001) in group A and B, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Phakic IOL implantation was better than PRK-MMC in the correction of high myopia in terms of visual quality, but the two methods had no difference with regard to visual acuity. Therefore, PRK-MMC can be used when the anterior chamber depth is a limiting factor in the implantation of phakic IOLs.