Clinical Results and Higher-Order Aberrations after 1.4-mm Biaxial Cataract Surgery and Implantation of a New Aspheric Intraocular Lens

Sonnleithner, Christoph von; Bergholz, Richard; Gonnermann, Johannes; Klamann, Matthias K. J.; Torun, Necip; Bertelmann, Eckart

doi:10.1159/000364808

Cited by 13 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our study showed satisfying repeatability using the A-scan: the TRT value was 14.0345 μm, and the ICC value was 0.9797. Bao et al [30] assessed the repeatability of CCT with the A-scan. They found that the TRT value was 7.65 μm, and the ICC value was 0.994.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Precision and Agreement of Central Corneal Thickness Measured with E-pach, A-scan, Corvis ST and Pentacam

Liu

Wang

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To assess the precision (repeatability and reproducibility) and agreement of central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements by E-pach, Pentacam, Corvis ST and A-scan devices in healthy eyes. Methods Instrument diagnostic test study. A total of 100 patients were enrolled to measure right-eye CCT by E-pach, Pentacam, Corvis ST, and A-scan devices. To assess repeatability and reproducibility, the test-retest repeatability (TRT) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated. The agreement among the four devices was evaluated with Bland-Altman plots. Results The E-pach showed repeatability (ICC=0.9981), interobserver reproducibility (ICC=0.9971) and intersession reproducibility (ICC=0.9825); the Pentacam, Corvis ST and A-scan also showed similar repeatability (all ICC≥0.9679), interobserver reproducibility (all ICC≥0.9730) and intersession reproducibility (all ICC≥0.9647). However, the E-pach yielded CCT values that were obviously lower than those of the A-scan and Pentacam (P<0.001) but higher than those of the Corvis ST (P<0.001). The 95% limits of agreement (LoA) in the Bland-Altman plots were 44.5 µm (E-pach vs. A-scan), 34.9 µm (E-pach vs. Corvis CT) and 32.5 µm (E-pach vs. Pentacam). Conclusions The E-pach is a portable, reliable and inexpensive pachymeter. However, the CCT values obtained from the E-pach are not interchangeable with those from Pentacam, Corvis ST and A-scan devices.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Precision and Agreement of Central Corneal Thickness Measured with E-pach, A-scan, Corvis ST and Pentacam

Liu

Wang

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It was treated with contact lens, and in day 4 the wound was stable without need for additional treatment. Other authors report anterior chamber instability during the surgery [ 5 ]. In our series of patients, where the Stellaris Phaco System with forced infusion was used, we did not observe above-mentioned problem.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…B-MICS resulted from the interplay of several factors including microcorneal incisions, bimanuality, improved use of fluids, rapidly progressing instrumentation, and adequate use of low-energy ultrasound phacoemulsificators [ 2 ], including development of new sleeveless tip [ 3 , 4 ]. Advantages for this procedure are lower surgically induced astigmatism (SIA), less postoperative higher-order corneal aberrations (HOA) and lower endothelial cell loss [ 5 – 7 ]. Furthermore, it seems reasonable to conclude that smaller incision size has lower impact on corneal biomechanics, shortens recovery time and reduces number of endophthalmitis, although until now there is no clear evidence to support these hypotheses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Incise monofocal intraocular lens (IOL, Bausch & Lomb) is the first innovative IOL that can be implanted without a convention tunnel preparation but through 1.4 mm paracentesis. In the available literature, only three promising study results with short follow-up period up to 6 months were published on clinical outcomes of this lens [ 5 – 7 ]. Above-mentioned studies were performed with biaxial technique with IOL implantation from 1.4 mm [ 5 ] and 1.6 mm [ 6 ] clear cornea incision and one with coaxial microincision (C-MICS), where the lens was implanted through 1.8 mm incision [ 7 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clinical results after microincision biaxial cataract surgery and implantation of an Incise intraocular lens

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo evaluate clinical outcomes after uncomplicated microincision biaxial cataract surgery and implantation of Incise intraocular lens (IOL).MethodsThis study included 47 eyes of 29 patients (mean age 62.2 ± 8.6 years), who underwent 1.4-mm biaxial cataract surgery with implantation of the Incise IOL (Bausch and Lomb). At third month, surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) was calculated. Three, 6 and 12 months postoperatively, uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), corrected near visual acuity (CNVA) LogMAR ETDRS, spherical equivalent refraction (SER), photopic distance corrected contrast sensitivity (CS) with and without glare (85 cd/m2) (CSV-1000) were assessed. One year after surgery, late complications were assessed and subjects were questioned for subjective symptoms.ResultsMean of SIA was equal 0.29 ± 0.16 D. Three months postoperatively: mean UDVA improved from 0.83 to 0.04 (p < 0.001), CDVA from 0.58 to −0.05 (p < 0.001) and CNVA from 0.58 to −0.02 (p < 0.001) and all were stable during 1-year follow-up. Three months postoperatively, the mean SER was equal 0.07 ± 0.61 D and was within ±0.5 D in 79%, and within 1 D in 88% of eyes. During follow-up period, corrected CS with and without glare for distance was found to be within normal limits. The only late complication was posterior capsule opacification (PCO). Subjective quality of vision was very high; none of patients complained about glare.ConclusionsBiaxial cataract surgery with implantation of the Incise IOL provided excellent clinical outcomes by minimizing SIA, stable refraction and low incidence of PCO.

show abstract

“…According to a recent study [ 6 ], there are new aspheric intraocular lenses that are small enough to fit through a 1.4 mm incision, which saves the trouble of having an extra step for the IOL implant. Since the trend in cataract surgery has been to minimize the corneal incision, the 1.4 mm incision of B-MICS may have advantages in refractive surgery [ 4 , 5 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bimanual Microincision Cataract Surgery versus Coaxial Microincision Cataract Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Cohort Studies

Chu

et al. 2017

Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of bimanual microincision cataract surgery (B-MICS) and coaxial microincision cataract surgery (C-MICS). Methods Three databases were searched for papers that compared B-MICS and C-MICS from inception to June 2016. The following intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were included in the final meta-analysis: ultrasound time (UST), effective phacoemulsification time (EPT), balanced salt solution use (BSS use), mean surgery time, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central corneal thickness (CCT), and increased CCT. Results There were no statistically significant differences in mean surgery time, UST, BSS use, BCVA, CCT, or increased CCT (one subgroup at postoperative day 7-8 and another subgroup at postoperative day 30). However, there was less EPT needed during surgery (p < 0.01) and lower levels of increased CCT at postoperative day 1 (p = 0.02) in the B-MICS group compared with the C-MICS group. Conclusions The EPT was shorter and increased CCT was less at postoperative day 1 in the B-MICS group. There were no statistically significant differences in other intraoperative and postoperative outcomes between the B-MICS group and the C-MICS group. B-MICS is an efficient and safe cataract surgery procedure.

show abstract

Clinical Results and Higher-Order Aberrations after 1.4-mm Biaxial Cataract Surgery and Implantation of a New Aspheric Intraocular Lens

Abstract: The aspheric microincision IOL was safely implanted through a 1.4-mm incision and showed similarly good postoperative outcome in comparison to 1.8- and 2.2-mm coaxial phacoemulsification.

Cited by 13 publications

References 39 publications

Precision and Agreement of Central Corneal Thickness Measured with E-pach, A-scan, Corvis ST and Pentacam

Precision and Agreement of Central Corneal Thickness Measured with E-pach, A-scan, Corvis ST and Pentacam

Clinical results after microincision biaxial cataract surgery and implantation of an Incise intraocular lens

Bimanual Microincision Cataract Surgery versus Coaxial Microincision Cataract Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Cohort Studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About