Secondary Sutureless Posterior Chamber Lens Implantation with Two Specifically Designed IOLs: Iris Claw Lens versus Sutureless Trans-Scleral Plugs Fixated Lens.

iris claw lens secondary implantation sutureless fixation sutureless trans-scleral plugs fixated lens

Journal

Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
20 May 2021
Historique:
received: 29 03 2021
revised: 03 05 2021
accepted: 12 05 2021
entrez: 2 6 2021
pubmed: 3 6 2021
medline: 3 6 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The management of patients with aphakia and/or lack of capsular support remains debated. The sutureless posterior chamber IOL (PCIOL) fixation is a very useful surgical option. The purpose of the study was to compare the early outcomes as well as post-operative best corrected visual acuity, refractive errors and complications of two different techniques of sutureless PCIOL secondary implantation. Patients who underwent secondary implantation from December 2019 to January 2021 in the Department of Ophthalmology of Creteil Hospital, and in the Granville Ophthalmology Center, were retrospectively included. Eyes implanted with the iris claw lens (Artisan Aphakia IOL model 205, Ophtec BV, Groningen, The Netherlands) were included in group 1, and eyes implanted with a newly developed sutureless trans-scleral plugs fixated lens (STSPFL, Carlevale lens, Soleko, Pontecorvo, Italy) were included in group 2. Twenty-two eyes of 22 patients were enrolled in group 1, and twenty eyes of 20 patients in group 2. No difference was found in visual acuity between two groups (0.35 +/- 0.29 logmar for group 1 and 0.23 +/- 0.51 logmar for group 2) ( No significant differences in terms of the recovery of visual acuity were found between the two groups. Group 2 (STPFL) gives better results in our sample due to less post-operative induced astigmatism and less refractive error.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The management of patients with aphakia and/or lack of capsular support remains debated. The sutureless posterior chamber IOL (PCIOL) fixation is a very useful surgical option. The purpose of the study was to compare the early outcomes as well as post-operative best corrected visual acuity, refractive errors and complications of two different techniques of sutureless PCIOL secondary implantation.
METHODS METHODS
Patients who underwent secondary implantation from December 2019 to January 2021 in the Department of Ophthalmology of Creteil Hospital, and in the Granville Ophthalmology Center, were retrospectively included. Eyes implanted with the iris claw lens (Artisan Aphakia IOL model 205, Ophtec BV, Groningen, The Netherlands) were included in group 1, and eyes implanted with a newly developed sutureless trans-scleral plugs fixated lens (STSPFL, Carlevale lens, Soleko, Pontecorvo, Italy) were included in group 2.
RESULTS RESULTS
Twenty-two eyes of 22 patients were enrolled in group 1, and twenty eyes of 20 patients in group 2. No difference was found in visual acuity between two groups (0.35 +/- 0.29 logmar for group 1 and 0.23 +/- 0.51 logmar for group 2) (
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
No significant differences in terms of the recovery of visual acuity were found between the two groups. Group 2 (STPFL) gives better results in our sample due to less post-operative induced astigmatism and less refractive error.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34065508
pii: jcm10102216
doi: 10.3390/jcm10102216
pmc: PMC8161112
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Références

J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010 Feb;36(2):254-9
pubmed: 20152606
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2021 Jun 1;47(6):792-801
pubmed: 33278236
Eur J Ophthalmol. 2020 May;30(3):612-615
pubmed: 32000520
J Clin Med. 2021 Mar 13;10(6):
pubmed: 33805747
J Cataract Refract Surg. 1997 Nov;23(9):1289-94
pubmed: 9423897
J Refract Surg. 2013 Feb;29(2):90-4
pubmed: 23380408
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2020 May;46(5):716-720
pubmed: 32358266
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008 Sep;34(9):1433-8
pubmed: 18721701
Acta Ophthalmol. 2020 May;98(3):224-236
pubmed: 31788964
J Refract Surg. 2021 Feb 1;37(2):126-132
pubmed: 33577699
Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2020 Jan;31(1):50-60
pubmed: 31789971
Eur J Ophthalmol. 2021 Jan 30;:1120672121991358
pubmed: 33517768
BMC Ophthalmol. 2015 Oct 27;15:143
pubmed: 26507387
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007 Nov;33(11):1851-4
pubmed: 17964387
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2018 Feb;44(2):129-133
pubmed: 29502861
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014 Jan;40(1):2-7
pubmed: 24355716

Auteurs

Daniel Seknazi (D)

Department of Ophthalmology, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, 94010 Créteil, France.

Donato Colantuono (D)

Department of Ophthalmology, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, 94010 Créteil, France.

Rachid Tahiri (R)

Granville Center of Ophthalmology, 50400 Granville, France.

Francesca Amoroso (F)

Department of Ophthalmology, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, 94010 Créteil, France.

Alexandra Miere (A)

Department of Ophthalmology, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, 94010 Créteil, France.

Eric H Souied (EH)

Department of Ophthalmology, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal de Créteil, 94010 Créteil, France.

Classifications MeSH