RESUMEN
Purpose: To compare the slit?lamp method and wavefront aberrometry method based on outcomes of toric realignment surgeries. Settings: Tertiary care ophthalmic hospital. Design: Retrospective study. Methods: This study included all eyes undergoing toric intraocular lens (TIOL) realignment surgery between January 2019 and December 2021 for which TIOL axis assessment by slit?lamp method and wavefront aberrometry method was available. Data were retrieved from electronic medical records, and we documented demographics, uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), subjective refraction, and TIOL axis by slit?lamp and wavefront aberrometry methods on postoperative day 1 and day 14. In patients with misalignment, TIOL was realigned to the original position in group 1 (27 patients) and to an axis based on calculations provided by wavefront aberrometer in group 2 (25 patients). Post?realignment surgery, UCVA, subjective refraction, and TIOL axis by slit?lamp and wavefront aberrometry methods were assessed and analyzed. Results: We analyzed 52 eyes and found that the mean preoperative misalignment with the slit?lamp method (44.9° ±20.0°) and wavefront aberrometry (47.1° ±19.5°) was similar. The corresponding degrees of misalignment post?TIOL repositioning surgeries were 5.2° ±5.2° (slit?lamp method) and 4.7° ±5.1° (wavefront aberrometry) (P = 0.615). Both groups showed significant improvement in median log of minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) UCVA and reduction in median refractive cylinder. Conclusions: Slit?lamp method is as good as wavefront aberrometer method to assess TIOL axis. Toric realignment surgery is found to be safe, and realigning TIOL based on either slit?lamp method or wavefront aberrometer method equally improved UCVA and decreased residual refractive cylinder.
RESUMEN
Aims: Image-guided systems are the gold standard for determining toric intraocular lens (IOL) axis alignment. However, their high cost prevents widespread use of these systems. As an alternative, a simpler and affordable method could be performed manually using a slit-lamp biomicroscope. This study aims to compare the accuracy of manual toric IOL axis marking using a slit-lamp compared to the CALLISTO eye image-guided system.Study Design: Prospective comparativeMethods: In this prospective study, toric IOL axis alignment of 42 eyes with cataract and coexisting corneal astigmatism were evaluated using manual slitlamp method and CALLISTO eye image-guided method. Preoperative and postoperative uncorrected visual acuity, best corrected visual acuity, amount of spherical and astigmatic refractive errors, and postoperative IOL axis alignment were evaluated. Intraclass correlation of the manual method was calculated and the difference of IOL axis alignment to the image-guided method was compared.Results: Toric IOL implantation reduced the amount of astigmatic refractive error from -1.63 � 0.65 D to -0.50 � 0.19 D in the image-guided group and from -1.93 � -0.90 D to -0.87 � 0.26 D in the manual slitlamp group. As many as 90.5% of eyes in the image-guided group and 81.0% of eyes in the manual slitlamp group reached the target induced astigmatism (p=0.38). Manual axis marking showed intraclass correlation of 99.3%. However, when the manual method was compared to the image-guided method a mean difference in axis alignment of 10.98o (95% confidence interval: 9.32o - 12.63o) was observed.Conclusions: Alignment of toric IOL axis using the manual method demonstrated a consistent result; yet producing a considerable difference to the result of the image-guided method.