Purpose To evaluate the visual and refractive outcomes of monofocal toric intraocular lens (IOL) implantation after cataract surgery in amblyopic eyes Methods Our center’s database was used to identify patients who had undergone bilateral cataract surgery between 2016 and 2020 with the implantation of a toric IOL in their amblyopic eye. Exclusion criteria were the presence of strabismus, ocular pathologies other than cataract or intra-surgical complications. The outcomes analysed were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), subjective refraction and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) one month after surgery. Results Ninety patients were included, with a mean age of 68.96 ± 7.81years. CDVA was lower for the amblyopic eye, both before and after surgery. There was a mean improvement in CDVA of 0.23 ± 0.21 LogMAR for the dominant eye and of 0.39 ± 0.33 for the amblyopic eye, p < 0.001 in both cases. Postoperative subjective refractive cylinder was higher in the amblyopic eye (-0.24 ± 0.39 D versus −0.10 ± 0.25 D, p < 0.01), as well as mean cylinder prediction error (-0.30 ± 0.47 D versus 0.02 ± 0.42 D, p < 0.01), compared to the dominant eye. There was a statistically significant correlation between preoperative and postoperative CDVA in amblyopic eyes (Spearmańs Rho = 260, p = 0.013). Mean postoperative UCVA was 0.15 ± 0.25 for amblyopic and 0.03 ± 0.12 for dominant eyes. Only one patient required distance spectacle correction due to residual astigmatism. Conclusions Cataract surgery with toric IOL implantation in amblyopic eyes leads to an improvement in visual acuity and to spectacle independence in almost all cases, even in the presence of a higher cylinder prediction error.

PurposeTo determine changes in anterior chamber depth (ACD), iridocorneal angle size (IAS) and central corneal thickness (CCT) using optical coherence tomography (OCT) and Scheimpflug imaging technology (SIT) in subjects implanted with multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) after femtosecond cataract surgery.MethodsProspective study of 36 healthy eyes (68.8 ± 7.9 years) undergoing femtosecond laser assisted‐cataract surgery and AcrySof REsTOR SN6AD1 IOL implantation. The anterior segment parameters were measured preoperatively and 1 month after surgery with the Visante‐OCT (Zeiss) and the Oculyzer™ II (WaveLight® AG) systems. Analysis of agreement and interchangeability of the preoperative 2 systems measurements was performed by the Bland‐Altman method.ResultsAfter femtosecond cataract surgery, the ACD and IAS measured with Oculyzer™ II showed a significant mean increase of 1.54 ± 0.28 mm and 10.2 ± 4.23 respectively. Also, using the Visante‐OCT there was a significant mean increase: 1.27 ± 0.34 mm for ACD and 9.38 ± 6.52 (Temporal) and 8.29 ± 7.13 (nasal) for IAS. CCT showed no significant changes. The range of agreement indicated that the 2 techniques cannot be used interchangeably for preoperative measurement of ACD and IAS.ConclusionsAfter cataract surgery with femtosecond laser, ACD and IAS increased significantly when measured using OCT and SIT. Visante‐OCT and Oculyzer™ II systems can be used interchangeably for CCT evaluation but not for ACD and IAS.

Objective: To study and compare the value of central corneal thickness in a healthy adult population, using different non-contact techniques from daily clinical practice. Method: This work examines and compares the pachymetric measurements of 71 eyes of 36 healthy adult patients. Corneal thickness was evaluated using three non-contact instruments: a CEM-530 specular microscope (Nidek), Pentacam HR corneal tomography (Oculus), and Cirrus HD-OCT 5000 optical coherence tomography (Carl Zeiss Meditec). Tests were performed consecutively by a single observer in the same session and under the same environmental conditions. Results: The results obtained using the three devices are interchangeable, given that no statistically significant difference was observed among them. The study did not find statistically significant difference with respect to gender either. Conclusion: These three non-contact methods for the measurement of corneal central pachymetry are a reliable alternative to ultrasonic contact pachymetry.