Performance of Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens in Eyes with Pre-existing Retinal Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) offers improved near and intermediate vision, aiming to reduce spectacles dependence in cataract patients. This research aims to evaluates the performance of EDOF IOL in patients with retinal pathologies following cataract surgery. METHODS: The medical charts of thirty-three eyes with retinal pathologies and 100 healthy eyes that underwent cataract extraction with implantation of an EDOF IOL and had at least 3 weeks postoperative follow-up were retrospectively included. Patients' overall satisfaction, spectacle dependence, visual perception, and side effects were evaluated with a self-reported questionnaire. RESULTS: Mean uncorrected visual acuities (LogMAR) were significantly better in the healthy eyes compared with the eyes with retinal pathologies: 0.05 and 0.10, p=0.011 (distance), 0.06 and 0.16, p=0.001 (intermediate) and 0.20 and 0.28, p=0.026 (near), respectively. No or rare use of spectacles for any distance was reported by 71% and 38% of patients, respectively (p=0.004). Haloes/glare were reported by 17% and 23%, respectively, (p=0.556); only in 7% and 4% it was clinically disturbing (p>0.999). The same IOL would be chosen again in 77% and 73% of patients, respectively, (p=0.550). CONCLUSION: Patients with retinal pathologies who were implanted with an EDOF IOL demonstrated excellent distant uncorrected visual results with reasonable intermediate and near uncorrected visual results alongside high satisfaction; however, results were inferior to those of the control healthy eyes.

Custom-Made Artificial Iris and Toric-Intraocular Lens Intrascleral Flange Fixation: A Case Report.

Different techniques for artificial iris implantation with or without an intraocular lens, depending on lens status, are described in the literature. We describe a surgical technique for a custom-made artificial iris and toric-intraocular lens intrascleral flange fixation. We modified the "Backpack" artificial iris implantation surgical technique to facilitate an accurate alignment of the toric-intraocular lens in a patient with aphakia, aniridia, and high asymmetric astigmatism secondary to blunt trauma. Two months after the surgery, uncorrected visual acuity was 20/30, corrected to 20/25 with a refraction of -2.00 in the diopter sphere with no residual astigmatism. The artificial iris implant and toric-intraocular lens were well-centered. The patient was satisfied with the visual and cosmetic outcomes. This procedure, however, is not complication-free as our patient developed uveitis and increased intraocular pressure during the postoperative period, which was treated successfully.

Retention time of different ophthalmic viscosurgical devices during phacoemulsification in rabbit ocular model: A comparative analysis.

BACKGROUND: To compare retention times of various ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVDs) and soft-shell combinations. METHODS: Experimental study. Eighteen rabbit eyes were divided into six groups of three eyes, based on OVDs tested. A: Endocoat, B: HealonPro, C: Viscoat, D: Provisc, E: Endocoat and HealonPro and F: Viscoat and Provisc. OVDs were stained with 10% fluorescein dye before being injected into the anterior chamber. Phacoemulsification, using fixed parameters, was performed. If OVD persisted after 60 s, a standardised irrigation and aspiration technique replaced phacoemulsification. The time until central and complete clearance of the OVD were video-recorded and measured. RESULTS: Mean central retention times (CRT) were found to be: HealonPro-5.33 ± 2.56 s, Provisc-3.33 ± 1.11 s, Endocoat-75.0 ± 3.26 s, Viscoat-62.33 ± 5.19 s, combining HealonPro with Endocoat-22.67 ± 4.75 s and Provisc with Viscoat-11.0 ± 0.82 s. The mean total retention time (TRT) was: Endocoat-80.0 ± 8.17 s, Viscoat-81.67 ± 2.09 s, HealonPro with Endocoat-81.33 ± 3.35 s, and Provisc with Viscoat-71.0 ± 2.94 s. For HealonPro and Provisc, CRT and TRT remained identical across all trials. CONCLUSIONS: Retention times varied, with cohesive OVDs exhibiting shorter durations than dispersive OVDs. Among dispersive OVDs, TRTs were comparable; however, Endocoat displayed an extended CRT. In soft shell trials, the combination of HealonPro and Endocoat exhibited prolonged CRT and TRT, suggesting enhanced corneal protection.

Comparison of flanged polypropylene scleral intraocular lens fixation with scleral sutured fixation.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome of 2 intraocular lens (IOL) scleral fixation techniques: double-flanged polypropylene and Hoffman scleral pocket. METHODS: Retrospective case series of all patients who underwent IOL scleral fixation by either the flange (flange group) or Hoffman scleral pocket (Hoffman group) techniques at the Kaplan Medical Center and the Edith Wolfson Medical Center. RESULTS: A total of 140 patients were included (63 flange, 77 Hoffman). The final distance-corrected visual acuity was similar between the flange and Hoffman groups (0.42 ± 0.5 and 0.51 ± 0.5 logMAR, respectively; p = 0.23), but the spherical equivalent was less myopic in the flange group (-0.63 ± 2 and -2.3 ± 1.3 D, respectively; p = 0.003). In the flange group, there were more cases of elevated IOP (17.5% vs 5.2%; p = 0.02), corneal edema (11.1% vs 1.3%; p = 0.02), cystoid macular edema (15.9% vs 2.6%; p = 0.005), and IOL decentration (19% vs 7.8%; p = 0.07). The flange group had a higher rate of combined additional procedures during the fixation surgery (68.3% vs 32%; p < 0.001), but surgery duration was not prolonged (70 vs 77 minutes; p = 0.29). CONCLUSION: Comparison of scleral IOL fixations performed with the recently developed flange technique to the conventional Hoffman scleral pocket technique resulted in similar visual outcomes and less myopization. There were more complications in the newly adopted flange technique, which may be related to the higher rate of combined anterior vitrectomy and pars plana vitrectomy. The flange technique is effective, with a shorter learning curve and similar surgical time. Therefore, it can become a viable method for scleral IOL fixation in the absence of zonular support.

Risk factors for a phacodonesis surprise during cataract surgery in patients with pseudoexfoliation.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the association of different pre-operative parameters with surprise phacodonesis during cataract surgery among patients with pseudoexfoliation (PXF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective charts review of all PXF patients who underwent cataract surgery between the years 2013 and 2018. Pre-operative parameters (demographics, biometry, intraocular pressure (IOP), endothelial cell count, pupil size, cataract density, glaucoma status, cup to disc ratio, number of glaucoma medications, prior intra-vitreous injections, risk for intraoperative floppy iris syndrome) were compared between patients with and without surprise phacodonesis. Binary logistic regression was used to calculate the predictive value of each parameter. RESULTS: Out of 396 surgical cases with computerized pre-operative assessment, we included 127 eyes of 120 PXF patients without evidence of phacodonesis preoperatively. The mean age was 77.8 ± 12.0 years, 63 (52.7%) were male, and 106 (84.2%) underwent phacoemulsification surgery. We identified 10 cases of surprise phacodonesis during surgery (8.2%). Compared to PXF cases without intraoperative phacodonesis, they had higher pre-operative IOP (23.0 ± 11.0 mmHg vs. 14.9 ± 3.8 mmHg, p < 0.001) and a higher rate of B scan use due to dense cataract obscuring posterior pole evaluation [4 (40%) vs. 15 (12.8%), p = 0.04]. Multivariant binary logistic regression confirmed that only baseline IOP contributed to the prediction of surprise phacodonesis (OR 1.22 CI 1.04-1.43, p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with PXF undergoing cataract surgery, elevated IOP and poor posterior segment visibility requiring B scan use were associated with zonular instability putting these patients at risk for intra-operative complications.

Influence of the CleaRing intraocular open capsule device on refractive predictability in cataract surgery.

BACKGROUND: The marked improvement in cataract surgery and intraocular lens (IOL) quality has led to a decline in posterior capsular opacification (PCO) incidence; however, PCO remains a common complication of cataract surgery. The CleaRing intraocular capsule open device (IOCD) decreases PCO incidence. We aimed to investigate the influence of the CleaRing IOCD on refractive predictability in cataract surgery. METHODS: We conducted this prospective pilot study at the Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel. Ten eyes of patients who underwent cataract surgery and insertion of an IOL after IOCD implantation into the capsular bag were included. All patients completed 12 months of follow-up, including refraction, measurement of uncorrected (UDVA) and best-corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), slit-lamp biomicroscopy, and ultrasound biomicroscopy. RESULTS: All the surgeries were uneventful, with no postoperative complications. The IOL was centred in the device and bag in all cases. The mean prediction error at 1 and 12 months postoperatively was +0.28 ± 0.32 D and +0.50 ± 0.32 D, respectively. The mean UDVA was 0.17 ± 0.13 and 0.15 ± 0.11 logMAR, and the mean CDVA was 0.04 ± 0.10 and 0.04 ± 0.06 logMAR, respectively. The manifest refractive cylinders at 12 months postoperatively were compatible with corneal astigmatism. CONCLUSIONS: Implantation of the IOCD resulted in a slight, predicted, and stable hyperopic shift with a low standard deviation. The standard deviation of the prediction error demonstrated excellent refractive accuracy and predictability using the IOCD, which was as low as 0.32 D at the 12-month follow-up.

Results of an Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lens Implantation in the Second Eye of Monofocal Pseudophakic Patients: A Pilot Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the visual results and patient satisfaction after implantation of an extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) in the second eye of patients implanted previously with a monofocal IOL in the first eye. METHODS: The medical records and self-reported questionnaires from patients who were implanted with monofocal IOLs in the first eye and EDOF IOLs in the second eye (group A) and from patients implanted bilaterally with EDOF IOLs (group B) were compared for visual acuity (VA), spectacle independence, patient satisfaction, and photic phenomena. RESULTS: Group A (23 eyes of 23 patients) had similar distance uncorrected VA and intermediate uncorrected VA compared with group B (72 eyes of 36 patients) (0.03±0.05 vs. 0.04±0.16; P =0.136 and 0.660, respectively). There was a tendency toward a better near uncorrected VA in group A compared with group B (0.15±0.14 vs. 0.23±0.17; P =0.074). Patients' perception of their VA was similar between groups. Spectacle independence for distance vision was reported by 16/17 (94.1%) and 35/36 (97.2%) patients ( P =0.543), 13/17 (76.5%) and 32/36 (88.9%) patients ( P =0.252) for intermediate vision, and 4/17 (23.6%) and 22/36 (61.1%) patients for near vision ( P =0.011), in groups A and B, respectively. There was no difference in complaints of photic phenomena between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients previously implanted with a monofocal IOL in 1 eye who are interested in improving their spectacle independence can be considered for an EDOF IOL implantation in the second eye and may have similar results to those implanted bilaterally with EDOF IOLs.

Clinical Outcomes of Toric Intraocular Lenses in Patients with Fuchs Endothelial Corneal Dystrophy.

INTRODUCTION: Implantation of toric intraocular lenses (IOLs) in patients with Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) is still considered relatively contraindicated, without sufficient clinical evidence. Therefore, this study was designed to evaluate the results of toric IOL implantation in patients with FECD. METHODS: A retrospective case-control study of 28 eyes of FECD patients and 84 eyes of healthy control patients who received toric IOLs during routine cataract surgery was performed. The outcome measures were uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity, spherical equivalent, and refractive residual astigmatism. RESULTS: The mean postoperative uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity in the FECD eyes compared to the control eyes were 0.15 ± 0.14 vs. 0.13 ± 0.17, respectively (P = 0.32), and 0.05 ± 0.08 vs. 0.06 ± 0.10, respectively (P = 0.95). The spherical equivalent in the FECD eyes compared to the control eyes was - 0.29 ± 0.43 vs. - 0.21 ± 0.50, respectively (P = 0.19). The preoperative corneal centroid astigmatism in the FECD eyes compared to the control eyes was 0.85 D@93° ± 2.42° vs. 0.23 D@68° ± 2.50°, respectively (P = 0.43), and the mean preoperative corneal astigmatism magnitude was 2.26 ± 1.1 D vs. 2.28 ± 1.03 D, respectively (P = 0.82). A trend toward higher postoperative refractive centroid astigmatism was found in the FECD eyes compared with the control eyes: 0.24 D@28° ± 0.57° vs. 0.03 D@127° ± 0.53°, respectively (P = 0.09). However, the mean refractive astigmatism magnitude was similar in FECD eyes and the healthy control eyes: 0.52 ± 0.31 D vs. 0.42 ± 0.31 D, respectively (P = 0.44) (D diopters). CONCLUSION: The postoperative refractive astigmatism (both centroid astigmatism and mean magnitude astigmatism) was no higher than 0.52 D in both groups. Therefore, FECD patients without corneal edema can be considered for toric IOLs.

Comparison of the Barrett toric calculator using measured and predicted posterior corneal astigmatism and the Kane and Abulafia-Koch calculators.

PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of the Barrett toric calculator with measured and predicted posterior corneal astigmatism (MPCA and PPCA, respectively), the Abulafia-Koch (AK) formula, and the toric Kane formula. SETTING: Ein-Tal Eye Center, Tel-Aviv, Israel. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. METHODS: Consecutive cases of patients who underwent uneventful cataract extraction surgery with implantation of a toric intraocular lens between March 2015 and July 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. 1 eligible eye from each patient was included. The predicted postoperative refractive astigmatism was calculated using each method and compared with the postoperative refractive astigmatism to give the prediction error. RESULTS: 80 eyes of 80 patients were included in this study. The mean centroid and the mean and median absolute prediction errors using Kane (0.25 diopters [D] ± 0.54 @ 6 degrees, 0.50 D ± 0.31 and 0.45 D, respectively) were significantly different compared with MPCA (0.12 D ± 0.52 @ 16 degrees, P < .001, .44 D ± 0.28 and 0.36 D, P = .027, respectively), PPCA (0.09 D ± 0.49 @ 12 degrees, P < .001, .41 D ± 0.27 and 0.35 D, P < .001, respectively), and AK (0.11 D ± 0.49 @ 11 degrees, P < .001, .42 D ± 0.27 and 0.35 D, P = .004, respectively). No significant differences were found between the calculators in the predictability rates within ±0.25 D, ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D. CONCLUSIONS: The measured posterior corneal curvature in the Barrett calculator yielded comparable outcomes to its prediction by the Barrett and AK formulas. The Kane calculator showed a slight against-the-rule prediction error compared with the other methods, resulting in a small higher median absolute error with marginal clinical importance.

Clinical outcomes of presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses in patients with Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy.

Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) is considered a contraindication for the implantation of presbyopia-correcting IOLs, without sufficient corroborating evidence. A Retrospective, case-control study. Nineteen eyes of ten patients with grade 2-5 FECD (study group) and 57 healthy eyes of 57 patients (control group) who underwent cataract surgery with implantation of presbyopia-correcting IOLs, at the Ein-Tal Eye Center, Tel Aviv, Israel, were included. The target refraction was emmetropia for both groups. Two subgroups of IOLs were analyzed separately: extended depth of focus (EDOF), (9 eyes of FECD patients and 27 eyes of control patients) and multifocal IOLs (10 eyes of FECD patients and 30 eyes of control patients). Main outcome measures were visual acuity and refraction 6 weeks after the surgery. Secondary outcomes were patient perceptions of visual acuity, spectacle independence, photic phenomena and satisfaction scores, reported in a self-assessment questionnaire. FECD patients in the EDOF IOL subgroup had inferior uncorrected distance visual acuity (P = 0.007) and better uncorrected near visual acuity (P = 0.001) compared to the controls. They had less spectacle independence for the intermediate range (P = 0.01) and overall (P = 0.006). However, they did not have more photic phenomena. In the multifocal IOL subgroup, no significant differences were found between the FECD and the control group in visual acuity for all ranges and in spectacle independence. FECD patients had more photic phenomena than the controls (P = 0.006), but it did not interfere with daily life activities. There was no difference in post-operative mean spherical equivalent, patient reported visual perception, and general satisfaction between FECD and control patients in both groups. Our results suggest that presbyopia-correcting IOLs can be carefully considered in patients with grade 2-5 FECD, with slightly inferior results compared with healthy eyes.

Deviation from the planned axis of three toric intraocular lenses.

In this study, we retrospectively evaluated the deviation from the planned axis of 3 Toric intraocular lenses (TIOL). Included in the study 190 eyes, operated by two surgeons using two different manual marking techniques. The patients were implanted with either AcrySof IQ Toric SN6AT (Alcon) (n = 90), POD FT (PhysIOL) (n = 50), or TECNIS Symfony Toric (J&J) (n = 50). At least 1 month postoperatively, the IOL was photographed, and the axis was measured using a designed software. The difference between the planned and actual axis was defined as axis deviation. The effect of IOL type, astigmatism direction, and marking techniques on the average degree and direction of the IOL deviation were evaluated and compared. There was no significant difference in the average deviation between the IOLs (TECNIS Symfony: 4.03° ± 4.34, POD FT: 3.52° ± 3.38, and SN6AT: 4.24° ± 4.10), and its direction (55.8%, 39.0%, and 56.6% clockwise (CW) deviation, respectively). With the rule, astigmatism had significantly more CW deviation compared with against the rule and oblique astigmatism (64.3%, 43.8%, and 41.7%, respectively, P = 0.027), but the average deviation was similar. The marking techniques did not influence the degree or direction of the deviation.

Results of using the AssiAnchor capsule device for subluxated crystalline lenses.

PURPOSE: To describe our results with the AssiAnchor capsule device in cases of subluxated crystalline lenses. METHODS: This was a retrospective consecutive case series. Seven eyes of four patients with subluxated crystalline lenses underwent lensectomy/phacoemulsification with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation using the AssiAnchor capsule device in the Kaplan medical center, ophthalmology department. Three patients had Marfan syndrome and one patient had experienced blunt trauma. Demographic data were collected as well as parameters of pre- and postoperative distance visual acuity and refraction, intra-, and postoperative complications, and IOL stability and centration. RESULTS: Six out of the seven surgical procedures were uneventful with in-the-bag implantation of the IOL. In the first surgery, a tear of the capsular bag lead to IOL exchanging and fixating to the AssiAnchor and to the iris. In the traumatic cataract case, two AssiAnchors were used. A capsular tension ring was implanted in six out of seven surgeries. The average follow-up time was 9.5 ± 6.8 months. All the IOLs were stable and well centered except for the first IOL that exhibited a slight temporal, but not clinically significant, decentration. The distance visual acuity and the refractive parameters improved significantly in all cases. CONCLUSION: We found the AssiAnchor capsule device an effective tool with a short learning curve for treating subluxated lenses.

Toric intraocular lens power calculation in cataract patients with keratoconus.

PURPOSE: Intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in eyes with keratoconus typically results in hyperopic postoperative refractive error. The purpose of this study was to investigate the visual and refractive outcomes in patients with keratoconus having cataract surgery with a toric IOL and compare IOL power calculation accuracy of conventional formulas and keratoconus-specific formulas. SETTING: Ein-Tal Eye Center, Tel-Aviv, Israel. DESIGN: Retrospective case-series study. METHODS: Postoperative visual acuity and manifest refraction were examined. The error in predicted refraction and IOL power calculation accuracy within a range of 0.50 to 2.00 diopters (D) were compared between different IOL calculating formulas. RESULTS: 32 eyes with keratoconus were included. Visual acuity improved in all cases, and subjective astigmatism decreased from -2.95 ± 2.10 D to -0.95 ± 0.80 D (P < .001). The mean absolute errors were as follows: Barrett True-K formula for keratoconus with measured or predicted posterior corneal power, 0.34 D; Barrett Universal II formula, 0.64 D; Kane formula, 0.69 D; Kane formula for keratoconus, 0.49 D; SRK/T formula, 0.56 D; Haigis formula, 0.72 D; Holladay 1 formula, 0.71 D, and Hoffer Q formula, 0.87 D. Barrett True-K formula with measured posterior corneal power, SRK/T formula, and Kane formula for keratoconus resulted in a prediction error within ±0.50 D of 87.5%, 59.4%, and 53.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Cataract removal with a toric IOL significantly improves visual acuity and decreases astigmatism in keratoconic eyes with a topographic central relatively regular astigmatic component. Keratoconus-specific formulas resulted in lower mean error in predicted refraction compared with conventional calculating formulas. Using the posterior corneal power within the Barrett True-K formula for keratoconus improved IOL power prediction accuracy.

Toric IOL Calculation in Eyes With High Posterior Corneal Astigmatism.

PURPOSE: To evaluate different calculation approaches for toric intraocular lens (IOL) calculation in cases with high posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA). METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent cataract extraction with implantation of toric IOLs by a single surgeon were reviewed. Eyes with measured PCA of 0.80 diopters (D) or greater were included. Errors in the predicted postoperative refractive astigmatism were calculated for the Abulafia-Koch formula, vector summation of anterior keratometry with posterior tomography, and the Barrett toric calculator using predicted and measured PCA. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-three consecutive cases of toric IOL implantation were reviewed. Seventeen eyes (10%) had PCA of 0.80 D or greater and were investigated. The mean absolute error was the lowest with Barrett's measured PCA (0.55 ± 0.38) followed by Barrett's predicted PCA mean absolute error (0.65 ± 0.31), vector summation (0.69 ± 0.33), and the Abulafia-Koch formula (0.80 ± 0.36). The rate of eyes with prediction errors within 0.25 D or less was the highest for Barrett's measured PCA (29.4%) followed by Barrett's predicted PCA (5.9%) and no eyes for the Abulafia-Koch formula and vector summation. The mean centroid prediction errors were lowest for Barrett's measured PCA and Barrett's predicted PCA (0.14 ± 0.66 @70, 0.14 ± 0.73 @179, respectively), followed by vector summation (0.35 ± 0.70 @5), and the Abulafia-Koch formula (0.39 ± 0.80 @179). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that in cases of high PCA, the Barrett toric calculator using direct measurements of PCA may have a potential advantage over predicted PCA in toric IOL calculations and vector summation of the anterior and posterior corneal astigmatism. [J Refract Surg. 2020;36(12):820-825.].

[IS THERE ANY ADVANTAGE IN CATARACT EXTRACTION ASSISTED WITH LASER?]

INTRODUCTION: Cataract surgery is one of the most performed surgeries worldwide. Cataract extraction and intra-ocular lens artificial implantation have made a revolution in the past years mainly due to advanced surgical techniques, usage of protecting viscoelastic agents that protect the cornea and anterior chamber, improved design and material of the implanted folded artificial lens, special lenses including toric and multifocal lenses and development of advanced formulas and calculators for predicated IOL power calculation. Recently, femtosecond laser was introduced to cataract surgery, replacing several manual steps of the surgery. The laser was suggested to improve accuracy, safety and refraction results of the surgery. In this article, we will review the literature and investigated the above claims.

Visual Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction for Trifocal, Extended Depth of Focus and Monofocal Intraocular Lenses.

PURPOSE: To assess visual outcomes and patient satisfaction for trifocal and extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses (IOLs) compared to monofocal IOLs with and without monovision. METHODS: Consecutive patients underwent bilateral cataract extraction surgery and implantation of either monofocal IOLs, monofocal IOLs using monovision, EDOF IOLs, or trifocal IOLs. Patients with preoperative biometric data, postoperative refraction, and visual acuity who completed a questionnaire regarding satisfaction and side effects were included. Visual outcome, spectacle independence, patient satisfaction, and subjective photic phenomena were assessed. RESULTS: Each group comprised 50 patients (100 eyes). The mean postoperative uncorrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuities (logMAR) were: 0.17 ± 0.14 (Snellen 20/30), not applicable, and not applicable for monofocal; 0.08 ± 0.12 (Snellen 20/24), not applicable, and 0.07 ± 0.12 (Snellen 20/23) for monovision; 0.03 ± 0.08 (Snellen 20/21), 0.08 ± 0.12 (Snellen 20/24), and 0.23 ± 0.17 (Snellen 20/34) for EDOF; 0.07 ± 0.09 (Snellen 20/23), 0.08 ± 0.11 (Snellen 20/24), and 0.02 ± 0.06 (Snellen 20/21) for trifocal. Spectacle independence was reported by 36%, 70%, 74%, and 92% of patients, respectively. Postoperative halos and/or glare were experienced by 2%, 6%, 14%, and 38%, respectively, of which 2%, 0%, 6%, and 10%, respectively, were functionally disturbing. A total of 64%, 72%, 78%, and 76%, respectively, would choose the same IOL again. CONCLUSIONS: Patient satisfaction rates were high in all groups. Trifocal IOLs were more effective in improving unaided whole range of vision, but were associated with a higher rate of photic phenomena. The EDOF IOL and monovision provided partial spectacle independence with less photic phenomena. [J Refract Surg. 2019;35(7):434-440.].

Case report: acute hydrops and spontaneous corneal perforation in a patient with keratoconus treated with colchicine for familial Mediterranean fever.

PURPOSE: To report a rare case of spontaneous corneal perforation after hydrops in keratoconus patients who suffer from familial Mediterranean fever and was treated systemically with Colchicine. METHODS: Case report. RESULTS: We report a case of a 30-year-old male with keratoconus and familial Mediterranean fever treated with colchicine, presented with acute hydrops in his left eye, which progressed to a spontaneous corneal perforation. Attempts to treat the perforation with cyanoacrylate glue failed, and he underwent penetrating keratoplasty with an excellent visual outcome. CONCLUSION: Colchicine treatment may have had a role in the pathogenesis of this rare case.

Accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation using three optical biometry measurement devices: the OA-2000, Lenstar-LS900 and IOLMaster-500.

PURPOSE: To compare ocular measurements of three optical biometry devices and their application in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations. METHODS: One hundred and forty eyes which had undergone cataract extraction surgery with preoperative biometry with OA--2000, IOLMaster-500, and Lenstar-LS900 were enrolled. Biometry measurements of the three devices were compared. The deviation of the postoperative refraction from the preoperative refractive target was calculated with different formulas (Barrett Universal II, Hoffer Q, Holladay I, and SRK/T). Errors in the predicted astigmatism using the Barrett toric calculator were calculated for the toric IOLs. Additional 6465 eyes in which the IOLMaster-500 failed to measure axial length (AL) were reviewed. The percentage of successful measurements using the OA-2000 in those eyes was calculated. RESULTS: High agreement was found between the three devices for AL, anterior chamber depth, and average keratometry measurements (interclass correlation confidents: 1.000, 0.970, and 0.998, respectively, P < 0.001). The mean absolute prediction errors were similar using all formulas, ranging from 0.25 to 0.29 D, with no statistical significant difference between the three devices per each formula. The OA-2000 yielded a lower against-the-rule (ATR) centroid error in the predicted astigmatism than the IOLMaster-500 and Lenstar-LS900 (0.06 D ± 0.59 at 13.4° vs. 0.20 D ± 0.61 at 14.8° and 0.16 D ± 0.55 at 21.4°, respectively, P < 0.001, X-axis). Among 301 cases with unsuccessful AL readings using the IOLMaster-500, the OA-2000 had 284 (94.35%) successful measurements. CONCLUSIONS: The OA-2000 measurements showed good agreement with those of the IOLMaster-500 and Lenstar-LS900. Our results may suggest a potential advantage of the OA-2000 device in toric IOLs calculations and AL measurement success rate.

Further Enhancement of Intraocular Open-Capsule Devices for Prevention of Posterior Capsule Opacification.

PURPOSE: We improve the intraocular open-capsule devices (IOCD) for the prevention of posterior capsule opacification (PCO). METHODS: A total of 45 New Zealand rabbit eyes were divided into six similar groups after crystalline lens evacuation. Each group was implanted with a hydrophilic intraocular lens (IOL) and a hydrophilic IOCD of different designs. In the first experiment (Part A), a square design ring with and without large apertures was compared to a round design ring without apertures. In the second experiment (Part B), a square design ring with large apertures was compared to square design IOCDs with small apertures of high and low density. PCO and Soemmering's ring were evaluated clinically, by the Miyake Apple view, and histologically. The results were compared to a control group of eyes implanted with a hydrophilic IOL only. RESULTS: All devices showed significant prevention of PCO and Soemmering's ring compared to the control group. Part A: the square design with apertures had the lowest level of peripheral lens epithelial cells proliferation (protrusions). Part B: modifying the size and density of the apertures had no influence on those protrusions. CONCLUSIONS: The IOCD significantly reduced the rate of PCO and its precursor, Soemmering's ring. The rings with the square edges and apertures produced the best results. The study was underpowered to determine the influence of the apertures design. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: The IOCD has the potential to prevent up to 80% of the PCO cases; the most common complication after cataract surgery. The design of the ring is important for its success.