Corneal Collagen Cross-linking in Advanced Keratoconus: A 4-Year Follow-up Study.

PURPOSE: To analyze the safety and efficacy of standard corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL) in advanced cases of progressive keratoconus after 4 years of follow-up. METHODS: A retrospective case series of patients with advanced progressive keratoconus (stages 3 and 4 of Amsler-Krumeich classification) underwent standard CXL treatment. The parameters examined were changes in uncorrected visual acuity (UDVA), corrected visual acuity (CDVA), keratometry values (mean, flat, steep, and apical), pachymetry, and endothelial cell count at the baseline and at 12, 24, and 48 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Forty eyes of 40 patients were enrolled in the study. The mean patient age was 22.5 years (range: 15 to 37 years). Both mean UDVA and CDVA remained stable during the time points; no statistically significant change was noted. Although a slight reduction was observed in all keratometric readings, a statistically significant reduction was only reached in the apical keratometry (P = .037) at 4 years after CXL. A significant reduction in the corneal thickness was also found (ultrasonic: 388 ± 49 to 379 ± 48 µm; slit-scanning: 362 ± 48 to 353 ± 51 µm); however, this change was likely not clinically meaningful. Endothelial cell count was not significantly different at the end of the study. Treatment failure or progression was noted in two patients (5%) over the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Standard CXL treatment was safe and able to stabilize both visual acuity and topographic parameters at 4 years of follow-up in eyes with advanced keratoconus. [J Refract Surg. 2016;32(7):459-464.].

A clinical comparison between DisCoVisc and 2% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose in phacoemulsification: a fellow eye study.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to compare the effects and outcomes of two ophthalmic viscosurgical devices, 1.6% hyaluronic acid/4.0% chondroitin sulfate and 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose, during phacoemulsification. METHODS: This prospective, randomized clinical trial comprised 78 eyes (39 patients) that received phacoemulsification performed by the same surgeon using a standardized technique. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 1.6% hyaluronic acid/4.0% chondroitin sulfate or 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose on the first eye. The other eye was treated later and received the other viscoelastic agent. Preoperative and postoperative examinations (5, 24 and 48 hours; 7 and 14 days; 3 and 6 months) included measurements of the total volume of the ophthalmic viscosurgical device, ultrasound and washout times to completely remove the ophthalmic viscosurgical device, intraocular pressure, central corneal thickness and best-corrected visual acuity. The corneal endothelial cell count was measured at baseline and at six months postoperatively. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01387620. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between groups in terms of cataract density or ultrasound time. However, it took longer to remove 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose than 1.6% hyaluronic acid/ 4.0% chondroitin sulfate, and the amount of viscoelastic material used was greater in the 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose group. In addition, the best-corrected visual acuity was significantly better in the hyaluronic acid/ chondroitin sulfate group, but this preferable outcome was only observed at 24 hours after the operation. There were no statistically significant differences between the two ophthalmic viscosurgical devices regarding the central corneal thickness or intraocular pressure measurements at any point in time. The corneal endothelial cell count was significantly higher in the hyaluronic acid/chondroitin sulfate group. CONCLUSION: The ophthalmic viscosurgical device consisting of 1.6% hyaluronic acid/4.0% chondroitin sulfate was more efficient during phacoemulsification and was easier to remove after IOL implantation than 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose. In addition, the corneal endothelial cell count was significantly higher following the use of hyaluronic acid/chondroitin sulfate than with hydroxypropylmethylcellulose, which promoted an improved level of corneal endothelium protection.

A clinical comparison between DisCoVisc and 2% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose in phacoemulsification: a fellow eye study

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to compare the effects and outcomes of two ophthalmic viscosurgical devices, 1.6% hyaluronic acid/4.0% chondroitin sulfate and 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose, during phacoemulsification. METHODS: This prospective, randomized clinical trial comprised 78 eyes (39 patients) that received phacoemulsification performed by the same surgeon using a standardized technique. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 1.6% hyaluronic acid/4.0% chondroitin sulfate or 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose on the first eye. The other eye was treated later and received the other viscoelastic agent. Preoperative and postoperative examinations (5, 24 and 48 hours; 7 and 14 days; 3 and 6 months) included measurements of the total volume of the ophthalmic viscosurgical device, ultrasound and washout times to completely remove the ophthalmic viscosurgical device, intraocular pressure, central corneal thickness and best-corrected visual acuity. The corneal endothelial cell count was measured at baseline and at six months postoperatively. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01387620. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between groups in terms of cataract density or ultrasound time. However, it took longer to remove 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose than 1.6% hyaluronic acid/ 4.0% chondroitin sulfate, and the amount of viscoelastic material used was greater in the 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose group. In addition, the best-corrected visual acuity was significantly better in the hyaluronic acid/ chondroitin sulfate group, but this preferable outcome was only observed at 24 hours after the operation. There were no statistically significant differences between the two ophthalmic viscosurgical devices regarding the central corneal thickness or intraocular pressure measurements at any point in time. The corneal endothelial cell count was significantly higher in the hyaluronic acid/chondroitin sulfate group. CONCLUSION: The ophthalmic viscosurgical device consisting of 1.6% hyaluronic acid/4.0% chondroitin sulfate was more efficient during phacoemulsification and was easier to remove after IOL implantation than 2.0% hydroxypropylmethylcellulose. In addition, the corneal endothelial cell count was significantly higher following the use of hyaluronic acid/chondroitin sulfate than with hydroxypropylmethylcellulose, which promoted an improved level of corneal endothelium protection.

Effects of blue light-filtering intraocular lenses on the macula, contrast sensitivity, and color vision after a long-term follow-up.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the possible side effects and potential protection 5 years after implantation of an intraocular lens (IOL) with a blue-light filter (yellow tinted). SETTING: Ophthalmology Department, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. DESIGN: Prospective randomized clinical study. METHODS: Patients with bilateral visually significant cataract randomly received an ultraviolet (UV) and blue light-filtering IOL (Acrysof Natural SN60AT) in 1 eye and an acrylic UV light-filtering only IOL (Acrysof SA60AT) in the fellow eye. The primary outcome measures were contrast sensitivity, color vision, and macular findings 5 years after surgery. RESULTS: The study enrolled 60 eyes of 30 patients. There were no significant clinical or optical coherence tomography findings in terms of age-related macular degeneration in any eye. There were no statistically significant differences in central macular thickness between the 2 IOL groups (P=.712). There were also no significant between-group differences under photopic or scotopic conditions at any spatial frequency studied. No statistically significant differences in the color discrimination test were found between the 2 IOL groups (P=.674). CONCLUSIONS: After 5 years, there were no significant differences in color perception, scotopic contrast sensitivity, or photopic contrast sensitivity between the blue light-filtering (yellow-tinted) IOL and the IOL with a UV-light filter only (untinted). The potential advantage of the tinted IOL in providing protection to macular cells remains unclear.

Visual performance of an apodized diffractive multifocal intraocular lens with +3.00-d addition: 1-year follow-up.

PURPOSE: To determine whether implantation of a multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) with a lower addition (+3.00 diopters [D]) at the lens plane results in better intermediate visual acuity 1 year after surgery compared with a multifocal IOL with higher addition (+4.00 D). METHODS: This prospective, randomized, double-masked study included 80 eyes from 40 patients. Twenty patients were implanted bilaterally with the ReSTOR +3.00-D add IOL and 20 patients were implanted bilaterally with the ReSTOR +4.00-D add IOL. Primary outcome measures were distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity. Secondary outcomes were defocus curves, best reading distance, mesopic and photopic contrast sensitivity, quality of life, and spectacle independence. Monocular and binocular visual acuity were measured as uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity at 4 m, uncorrected near and distance-corrected near visual acuity at 40 cm, and uncorrected intermediate visual acuity and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity at 50, 60, and 70 cm. RESULTS: Twelve months postoperatively, no statistically significant difference between groups in distance and near visual acuity was noted. The ReSTOR +3.00-D add group performed better than the ReSTOR +4.00-D add group at all intermediate distances studied. The ReSTOR +4.00-D group chose a reading distance 8 cm closer than the +3.00-D group. Both groups performed similarly with respect to contrast sensitivity, quality of life, and spectacle independence rates. CONCLUSIONS: Patients implanted with a multifocal IOL with lower addition (ReSTOR +3.00 D) had better performance at intermediate distances compared with the ReSTOR +4.00-D add IOL with similar performance for distance and near visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and quality of life.

Comparison of reading performance after bilateral implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses with +3.00 or +4.00 diopter addition.

PURPOSE: To compare reading ability after cataract surgery and bilateral implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with a +3.00 diopter (D) addition (add) or a +4.00 D add. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. DESIGN: Prospective comparative study. METHODS: Patients scheduled for cataract surgery were randomly assigned to bilateral implantation of an aspheric AcrySof ReSTOR multifocal IOL with a +3.00 diopter (D) addition (add) or a +4.00 D add. The reading speed, critical print size, and reading acuity were measured binocularly with best correction using MNREAD acuity charts 6 months after surgery. Patients were tested with the chart at the best patient-preferred reading distance and at 40 cm. Binocular uncorrected and best distance-corrected visual acuities at far and near were also measured. RESULTS: The study enrolled 32 patients. At the best reading distance, the results were similar between the 2 IOL groups in all reading parameters. When tested at 40 cm, reading speed at all print sizes from 0.3 to 0.0 (all P<.001), critical print size (P<.001), and reading acuity (P = .014) were statistically significantly better in the +3.00 D IOL group than in the +4.00 D IOL group. Uncorrected and corrected visual acuities at far and near were similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Although the 2 IOL groups had similar performance in reading parameters, patients had to adjust to their best reading distance. The +3.00 D IOL performed better than the +4.00 D IOL at 40 cm.