Management of traumatic dislocation of crystalline lens: Retropupillary iris-claw versus sutureless intrascleral-fixated intraocular lens

Long-term functional outcome between Yamane technique and retropupillary iris-claw technique in a large study cohort

PURPOSE

To evaluate which secondary intraocular lens (IOL) implantation technique was more successful in achieving the best postoperative results and refractive outcomes between retropupillary iris-claw IOL (ICIOL) and flanged intrascleral IOL (FIIOL) fixation with the Yamane technique.

SETTING

Eye Clinic of the University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

METHODS

116 eyes of 110 patients who underwent ICIOL or FIIOL were analyzed. Patients with follow-up shorter than 6 months or with incomplete clinical data were excluded. Collected data included demographics, ocular comorbidity, indication of surgery, intraocular pressure, early (≤1 month) and late (>1 month) postoperative complications, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and manifest refraction at the last follow-up visit.

RESULTS

50% (n = 58) of eyes underwent FIIOL and 50% (n = 58) ICIOL implantation for aphakia (n = 44, 38%) and IOL dislocation (n = 72, 62%). No statistically significant differences in demographics, comorbidity, follow-up duration, postoperative complications, and surgical indications were found. The refractive prediction error (RPE) was 0.69 ± 0.94 diopter (D) in the FIIOL group and 0.21 ± 0.75 D in the ICIOL group ( P = .03), indicating residual hyperopia after both techniques. RPE, mean absolute error, and median absolute error were higher in the FIIOL group ( P = .003). ICIOL implantation was more successful in obtaining a RPE between -0.50 D and +0.50 D (52% of ICIOL, n = 30, and 31% of FIIOL, n = 18).

CONCLUSIONS

Both techniques were effective in increasing preoperative CDVA with no statistical difference between them. Although complication rates did not significantly differ, the FIIOL group exhibited less predictable refractive outcomes. Adjusting the dioptric power of the 3-piece IOL, as performed in ciliary sulcus implantation, to prevent myopic shift, is not recommended.

A meta-analysis of sutureless scleral-fixated intraocular lens versus retropupillary iris claw intraocular lens for the management of aphakia

This study compared the visual outcomes and complications between sutureless scleral-fixated intraocular lens and iris claw intraocular lens implantation in aphakia without adequate capsule and/or zonule support. Studies comparing the clinical outcomes of scleral-fixated intraocular lens and iris claw intraocular lens implantation published until April 2022 were retrieved from the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases. The outcomes included postoperative final visual acuity, surgical time, surgery-induced astigmatism, and complications. The weighted mean difference and odds ratio were calculated. Two randomized controlled trials and five cohort studies, including 244 and 290 eyes in the scleral-fixated intraocular lens group and iris claw group, respectively, were included. Scleral-fixated intraocular lens implantation results in a better postoperative final corrected distance visual acuity compared with iris claw intraocular lens implantation; however, it is more time-consuming. Scleral-fixated intraocular lens implantation seems to have lesser incidences of surgery-induced astigmatism. Furthermore, both procedures have a similar complication rate. Therefore, based on current best evidence, these two procedures should be considered according to patient's conditions.

Aetiology and Management of IOL Dislocations

Early (< 3 months) intraocular lens (IOL) dislocation occurs due to insufficient fixation in the capsular bag, while late dislocation (≥ 3 months) is due to increasing insufficiency of the zonular apparatus. Iris-fixated IOL (IFIOL) and suture- or sutureless-fixated scleral IOL (SFIOL) are currently the most commonly used methods when IOL exchange is indicated. Different methods of scleral fixation with or without sutures have been described. The most important techniques are summarised in this paper. IFIOL and SFIOL allow comparable visual outcomes but differ in their risk profile. The decision of which method to use should be made case by case and in accordance with the surgeon's preference.