PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation based on standard keratometry (K) and the new Total Keratometry (TK). METHODS: A post-hoc analysis of study data based on 145 pseudophakic astigmatic eyes was conducted. The absolute prediction error (APE) of spherical equivalent (SE) and cylinder (CYL) was calculated based on K and TK (including posterior corneal surface) data recorded 6 weeks after IOL implantation. APE was calculated as the difference between the postoperative refraction and the refractive error predicted by three classic IOL calculation methods (Haigis/Haigis-T, Barrett Universal II, Barrett Toric Calculator) and two new formulas developed for TK (Barrett TK Universal II, Barrett TK Toric). For APE in SE, the Haigis-T (K versus TK) and Barrett Universal II (K) versus Barrett TK Universal II (TK) were compared. For APE in CYL, the Haigis-T (K versus TK) and Barrett Toric Calculator (K) versus Barrett TK Toric formula (TK) were compared. RESULTS: Mean APE in SE and CYL was lower based on TK values compared to K, with a mean APE difference (K-TK) of 0.011 ± 0.107 diopters (D) (SE Haigis-T; 95% confidence interval [CI]:-0.004 to infinity), 0.016 ± 0.113 D (SE: Barrett Universal II versus Barrett TK Universal II; 95% CI: 0.0005 to infinity), 0.103 ± 0.173 D (CYL: Haigis-T; 95% CI: 0.0791 to infinity), and 0.020 ± 0.148 D (CYL: Barrett Toric versus Barrett TK Toric; 95% CI:-0.0002 to infinity). APE in SE was within ±0.50 D in 86% (Barrett TK Universal II) versus 84% (Barrett Universal II) of eyes. APE in CYL was within ±0.50 D in 58% (Haigis from TK) versus 44% (Haigis from K) of eyes. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to standard K, a higher prediction accuracy can be expected by using TK values along with the two newly developed formulas. TK values are compatible with standard IOL power calculation formulas and existing optimized IOL constants.

The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and performance of the second generation of an implantable intraocular pressure (IOP) sensor in patients with primary open angle glaucoma (POAG).DESIGN: prospective, noncomparative, open-label, multicenter clinical investigation.METHODS: In this study, patients with POAG, regularly scheduled for cataract surgery, were implanted with a ring-shaped, sulcus-placed, foldable IOP sensor in a single procedure after intraocular lens implantation. Surgical complications as well as adverse events (AEs) during 12 months of follow-up were recorded. At each follow-up visit, a complete ophthalmic examination, including visual acuity, IOP, slit lamp examination, and dilated funduscopy as well as comparative measurements between Goldmann applanation tonometry and the EYEMATE-IO implant were performed.RESULTS: The EYEMATE-IO implant was successfully implanted in 22 patients with few surgical complications and no unexpected device-related AEs. All ocular AEs resolved quickly under appropriate treatment. Comparative measurements showed good agreement between EYEMATE-IO and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC(3,k)) of 0.783 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.743, 0.817). EYEMATE-IO measurements were higher than GAT, with a mean difference of 3.2 mm Hg (95% CI: 2.8, 3.5 mm Hg).CONCLUSIONS: The EYEMATE-IO sensor was safely implanted in 22 patients and performed reliably until the end of follow-up. This device allows for continual and long-term measurements of IOP.

No abstract

Conclusions: *Acri. Smart 46S is a safe, effective and stable IOL that can also be used as the basis of complex refractive optical systems, e.g. for correction of astigmatism.

We describe a technique that uses a neodymium:YAG (Nd:YAG) laser photolysis system to prevent lens capsule opacification. The photolysis instrument consists of a 1064 nm Nd:YAG laser transmitted along a fiber-optic cable into a handpiece containing an angulated titanium plate that the laser beam strikes, creating plasma and a shockwave that exits the handpiece through an aperture. Under direct visualization, the shockwave is aimed at the inner surface of the anterior capsule, where it removes LECs and proteoglycan attachment molecules; the shockwave probably extends to the capsule fornix, destroying germinal epithelial cells. We report preliminary results in 12 eyes followed for approximately 2.5 years in which the treated nasal anterior capsule remained clear or with only slight opacity and the untreated temporal capsule developed moderate to severe opacification.