2023
DOI: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001154
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Double-flanged polypropylene technique: 5-year results

Abstract: To assess the long-term (5-year) results and complications of the double-flanged polypropylene technique in patients with capsular tension segment fixation, nonfoldable intraocular lens (IOL) scleral fixation, and foldable IOL scleral fixation.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
7
1

Year Published

2023
2023
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
7
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Our haptic exposure rate was comparable with another recent study. 25 Our rate of any postoperative cystoid macular edema is greater than reported elsewhere (25.3% FH vs. 10.7% in Patel et al 1 16 ); however, the proportion requiring treatment more intensive than topical drops (i.e., subtenon triamcinolone) was lower at 4.6%.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 51%
“…Our haptic exposure rate was comparable with another recent study. 25 Our rate of any postoperative cystoid macular edema is greater than reported elsewhere (25.3% FH vs. 10.7% in Patel et al 1 16 ); however, the proportion requiring treatment more intensive than topical drops (i.e., subtenon triamcinolone) was lower at 4.6%.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 51%
“…By contrast, their study involved the use of 5-0 and 6-0 polypropylene sutures instead of different haptics materials (PVDF and PMMA) as in our study. 15 Obata et al and Karaca et al described cases of endophthalmitis secondary to an exposed haptic after an intrascleral IOL fixation using the Yamane technique. 10,16 We had no transconjunctival flanges or endophthalmitis cases after a 12-month period of follow-up.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, I would like to address a discrepancy that has been identified in Table 2 of my article. 1 On closer examination, I agree that there is an error in the table. The corrected Table 2 is presented below.…”
mentioning
confidence: 89%