Although glistenings and folding marks were observed after the implantation of AcrySof IOLs, they did not significantly affect visual function.

<h4>PURPOSE</h4><p>To compare visual performance of the refractive Array SA40N and the diffractive CeeOn 811E multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and to evaluate the potential benefits of combining both multifocal IOLs in the same patient. </p> <h4>METHODS</h4><p>Two groups of cataract patients were unilaterally implanted with either the CeeOn diffractive (n=10) or the Array refractive multifocal IOL (n=10). Another group was bilaterally implanted with one of each multifocal IOLs (mix & match group, n=10). Visual acuity, spectacle independence, depth of focus, contrast sensitivity, presence of photic phenomena, and patient satisfaction were assessed postoperatively.</p> <h4>RESULTS</h4><p>All eyes achieved good distance visual acuity but better uncorrected near vision was achieved with the CeeOn diffractive design. Contrast sensitivity with either multifocal IOL was at the lower limit of the normal range but when multifocal IOLs were combined in the same patient, contrast sensitivity was not significantly different from phakic controls. Defocus curves revealed a superiority of CeeOn diffractive design for near and Array refractive design for intermediate but mix & match patients performed better overall than the other patients, particularly for intermediate distances, which was reflected by total independence from spectacles in 90% of patients compared to 60% in the other groups. Visual outcomes remained unchanged over time (1 month vs 6 month vs >3 years).</p> <h4>CONCLUSIONS</h4><p>Bilateral implantation with a diffractive multifocal IOL in one eye and a refractive multifocal IOL in the fellow eye is safe and could provide patients with better intermediate vision, increased depth of focus and contrast sensitivity, and also less dependence on spectacles. [<cite>J Refract Surg</cite>. 2008;24:233-242.]</p> <h4>ABOUT THE AUTHORS</h4> <p>From the Department of Ophthalmology, Dokuz Eylül University School of Medicine, Izmir, Turkey.</p> <p>The authors have no proprietary interest in the materials presented herein. </p> <p>Correspondence: Uzeyir Gunenc, MD, Dokuz Eylül Universitesi Tip Fakultesi, Göz Hastaliklari A.D., 35330 Inciralti, Izmir, Turkey. Tel: 90 532 342 37 36; Fax: 90 232 465 11 55; E-mail: <a href="mailto:ugunenc@deu.edu.tr">ugunenc@deu.edu.tr</a></p> <p>Received: November 13, 2006</p> <p>Accepted: March 12, 2007</p>

In addition to its optic material and rectangular optic edges, the AcrySof IOL provides additional advantages in lowering the incidence of PCO compared with rounded-edge PMMA IOLs.

In this experimental study, various foreign bodies were inserted into fresh bovine eyes, in different localizations. Twenty-one magnetic and non-magnetic foreign bodies, dimensions of which varied from 1.5 x 1.5 x 2 mm to 3.5 x 6 x 7 mm, were tried to detect by computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanning. In addition, further dissections were applied to check the ocular damage attributable to movement of the foreign bodies. Ferromagnetic foreign bodies have been shown to move in the eye and the risk of torsional forces being applied to the ferromagnetic foreign body seemed to cause intraocular complications during MRI scanning. All of the foreign bodies that were implanted in bovine eyes were recognized on CT scanning, except intraocular lenses. As a general rule, metallic foreign bodies produced beam-hardening artifacts, but these artifacts did not cause any problem in detecting the localizations of foreign bodies.

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of pseudophakic/aphakic eyes with uncontrolled glaucoma that underwent Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation with the tube placement in the ciliary sulcus.Methods: Medical records of the patients who underwent Ahmed glaucoma valve implantation through the ciliary sulcus, between December 2017 and June 2019, were reviewed retrospectively. Patients' age, gender, glaucoma diagnosis, visual acuity, intraocular pressure levels and complications were recorded.Results: Forty-seven eyes of 43 patients with glaucoma were enrolled. The mean age was 54.5 ± 19.9 years (range, 7 -88 years) at the time of surgery and the mean postoperative follow-up period was 7.9 ± 3.4 months (range, 3 -16 months). The mean preoperative intraocular pressure level was 35.2 ±6.8 mmHg (range, 25-55 mmHg) and it was found as 15.6 ± 5.4 mmHg (range, 9-33 mmHg) at last follow-up visit.Decrease in intraocular pressure level was statistically signi cant (P < 0.001). At last follow-up visit success was achieved in 41 eyes (87.2 %). Hyphema was the most common postoperative complication and developed in 11 eyes (23.4%) and resolved spontaneously in all of them within one month. Conclusion:In pseudophakic or aphakic eyes with uncontrolled glaucoma, placement of Ahmed glaucoma valve tube in the ciliary sulcus is a safe and effective procedure. Ciliary sulcus can be considered as a potential space during tube shunt surgery in eyes with high risk of tube-corneal touch or corneal decompensation.