A comparison of operating room toric placement tools: CALLISTO eye vs. e Wavetec AnalyzOR (CORTCO).
Astigmatism
Callisto eye
WaveTec ORA, toric intraocular lens
Journal
BMC ophthalmology
ISSN: 1471-2415
Titre abrégé: BMC Ophthalmol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967802
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 Oct 2024
28 Oct 2024
Historique:
received:
14
05
2024
accepted:
09
10
2024
medline:
29
10
2024
pubmed:
29
10
2024
entrez:
29
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To evaluate procedure times for two cataract planning systems (ZEISS CALLISTO eye and the Wavetec AnalyzOR) in predicting residual astigmatism (prediction error) and other visual outcomes in patients with corneal astigmatism (maximum allowable up to 3.0D) at postoperative month 1. This was a prospective, single center, parallel treatment group, bilateral and unilateral, randomized, 1-month study on patients scheduled to undergo routine, small-incision cataract surgery with a toric intraocular lens implantation. Both groups underwent preop measurements with the IOLMaster 700 (Zeiss, Jena, Germany) and surgery with the LenSx device (Alcon). Lens selection in the CALLISTO eye group was based on Zeiss VERACITY Surgery Planner (a web-based tool) and on the Wavetec AnalyzOR component of the ORA system (a real-time intraoperative aberrometer) for those eyes in the ORA group. All procedure and intraoperative times were measured with a stopwatch. Postoperative visual outcomes were evaluated between 1 and 2 months after surgery. There were 23 eyes in the CALLISTO group and 28 eyes in the ORA group. The mean surgical time for the CALLISTO group was 28.09 ± 1.72 min compared to 34.41 ± 1.52 min for the ORA group (P = 0.01). Toric lens placement mean time in the CALLISTO group was 2.47 ± 0.34 min compared to 3.88 ± 0.29 min in the ORA group (P = 0.0034). At month 1 postoperatively, the manifest refractive spherical error (MRSE) in the CALLISTO eye group 0.022 ± 0.388 diopters (D) compared to -0.174 ± 0.322 D in the ORA group; these were not statistically different. There was a higher percentage (75%) of eyes with an MRSE within 0.25D in the ORA group compared to the CALLISTO eye group (56.5%); at all other levels outcomes were numerically higher in the CALLISTO eye group. Less surgical time was needed when using the CALLISTO eye than the ORA when performing cataract surgery with toric lens implantation. There were similar visual outcomes between the groups and no statistical differences.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To evaluate procedure times for two cataract planning systems (ZEISS CALLISTO eye and the Wavetec AnalyzOR) in predicting residual astigmatism (prediction error) and other visual outcomes in patients with corneal astigmatism (maximum allowable up to 3.0D) at postoperative month 1.
METHODS
METHODS
This was a prospective, single center, parallel treatment group, bilateral and unilateral, randomized, 1-month study on patients scheduled to undergo routine, small-incision cataract surgery with a toric intraocular lens implantation. Both groups underwent preop measurements with the IOLMaster 700 (Zeiss, Jena, Germany) and surgery with the LenSx device (Alcon). Lens selection in the CALLISTO eye group was based on Zeiss VERACITY Surgery Planner (a web-based tool) and on the Wavetec AnalyzOR component of the ORA system (a real-time intraoperative aberrometer) for those eyes in the ORA group. All procedure and intraoperative times were measured with a stopwatch. Postoperative visual outcomes were evaluated between 1 and 2 months after surgery.
RESULTS
RESULTS
There were 23 eyes in the CALLISTO group and 28 eyes in the ORA group. The mean surgical time for the CALLISTO group was 28.09 ± 1.72 min compared to 34.41 ± 1.52 min for the ORA group (P = 0.01). Toric lens placement mean time in the CALLISTO group was 2.47 ± 0.34 min compared to 3.88 ± 0.29 min in the ORA group (P = 0.0034). At month 1 postoperatively, the manifest refractive spherical error (MRSE) in the CALLISTO eye group 0.022 ± 0.388 diopters (D) compared to -0.174 ± 0.322 D in the ORA group; these were not statistically different. There was a higher percentage (75%) of eyes with an MRSE within 0.25D in the ORA group compared to the CALLISTO eye group (56.5%); at all other levels outcomes were numerically higher in the CALLISTO eye group.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Less surgical time was needed when using the CALLISTO eye than the ORA when performing cataract surgery with toric lens implantation. There were similar visual outcomes between the groups and no statistical differences.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39468473
doi: 10.1186/s12886-024-03723-z
pii: 10.1186/s12886-024-03723-z
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Comparative Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
470Subventions
Organisme : Carl Zeiss Meditec AG
ID : Investigator-Initiated Trial
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Bellucci C, Panico A, Tedesco SA, et al. One-dioptre toric IOL versus spherical IOL in eyes with low preoperative corneal astigmatism. Int Ophthalmol May. 2023;43(5):1711–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-022-02571-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s10792-022-02571-4
Levitz L, Reich J, Roberts K, Hodge C. Evaluation of Toric Intraocular Lenses in Patients With Low Degrees of Astigmatism. Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila). 2015;4(5):245-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/APO.0000000000000112
Orts-Vila P, Aguilar-Corcoles S, Tello-Elordi C, Ramos-Alzamora M, Montes-Mico R, Tana-Rivero P. Trifocal toric intraocular lenses in eyes with low amount of corneal astigmatism. Int J Ophthalmol. 2020;13(10):1567–73. https://doi.org/10.18240/ijo.2020.10.09 .
doi: 10.18240/ijo.2020.10.09
pubmed: 33078106
pmcid: 7511383
Rocha-de-Lossada C, Rodriguez-Vallejo M, Rodriguez-Calvo-de-Mora M, Ribeiro FJ, Fernandez J. Managing low corneal astigmatism in patients with presbyopia correcting intraocular lenses: a narrative review. BMC Ophthalmol. 2023;6(1):254. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-023-03003-2 .
doi: 10.1186/s12886-023-03003-2
Hienert J, Ruiss M, Hirnschall N, Findl O. Assessing the astigmatism-reducing effect of toric intraocular lenses in eyes with low astigmatism: randomized masked bilateral comparison. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2023;1(8):826–31. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001211 .
doi: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001211
Lake JC, Victor G, Clare G, Porfirio GJ, Kernohan A, Evans JR. Toric intraocular lens versus limbal relaxing incisions for corneal astigmatism after phacoemulsification. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;17(12):CD012801. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012801.pub2 .
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012801.pub2
Goggin M. Toric intraocular lenses: evidence-based use. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2022;50(5):481–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/ceo.14106 .
doi: 10.1111/ceo.14106
Solomon JD. Callisto Eye Versus Intraoperative Aberrometry. Cataract & refractive surgery today. Bryn Mawr, PA: Bryn Mawr Communications; 2017.
Mayer WJ, Kreutzer T, Dirisamer M, et al. Comparison of visual outcomes, alignment accuracy, and surgical time between 2 methods of corneal marking for toric intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017;43(10):1281–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.07.030 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.07.030
Cionni RJ, Breen M, Hamilton C, Williams R. Retrospective analysis of an intraoperative aberrometry database: a study investigating absolute prediction in eyes implanted with low cylinder power toric intraocular lenses. Clin Ophthalmol. 2019;13:1485–92. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S191887 .
doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S191887
pubmed: 31496639
pmcid: 6689545
Hovanesian JA. Comparison of preoperative measurements with Intraoperative Aberrometry in Predicting need for correction in eyes with low astigmatism undergoing cataract surgery. Clin Ophthalmol. 2021;15:2189–96. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S314618 .
doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S314618
pubmed: 34113071
pmcid: 8183187
Kose B, Erdogan H. Comparison of Toric intraocular Lens Alignment using image-guided system and manual marking technique. Beyoglu Eye J. 2020;5(2):108–13. https://doi.org/10.14744/bej.2020.40427 .
doi: 10.14744/bej.2020.40427
pubmed: 35098072
pmcid: 8784482
Varsits RM, Hirnschall N, Doller B, Findl O. Evaluation of an intraoperative toric intraocular lens alignment system using an image-guided system. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2019;45(9):1234–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2019.04.009 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2019.04.009
Dubinsky-Pertzov B, Hecht I, Gazit I, et al. Clinical outcomes of Ankoris toric intraocular lens implantation using a computer-assisted marker system. Int Ophthalmol. 2020;40(12):3259–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-020-01511-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s10792-020-01511-4
Thulasi P, Khandelwal SS, Randleman JB. Intraocular lens alignment methods. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2016;27(1):65–75. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICU.0000000000000225 .
doi: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000225
Kaufman AR, Pineda R 2. Intraoperative aberrometry: an update on applications and outcomes. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2023;1(1):48–57. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICU.0000000000000915 .
Raufi N, James C, Kuo A, Vann R. Intraoperative aberrometry vs modern preoperative formulas in predicting intraocular lens power. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2020;46(6):857–61. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000173 .
doi: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000173
Ma J, El-Defrawy S, Lloyd J, Rai A. Prediction accuracy of intraoperative aberrometry compared with preoperative biometry formulae for intraocular lens power selection. Can J Ophthalmol. 2023;58(1):2–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjo.2021.06.024 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2021.06.024
Cleveland Eye Clinic. ORA System™ Technology: A Giant Step in the Improvement of Vision Through Intraocular Lens Surgery. Accessed November 9. 2023. https://www.clevelandeyeclinic.com/cataracts-ohio/ora-system/
Carolina Ophthalmology PA, ORA-Guided Cataract Surgery. Accessed Nov. 9, 2023. https://www.carolinaeyemd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/ORA-FAQs.pdf
Cao YX, Wang J. [Incipient observation of cornea astigmatism after combined cataract phacoemulsification and Callisto Eye-assisted arcuate keratotomy]. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2019;11(7):502–8. https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0412-4081.2019.07.005 .
doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0412-4081.2019.07.005