Aesthetics of iris reconstruction with a custom-made artificial iris prosthesis.

Patients with large iris defects not only suffer from functional disadvantages but also from aesthetic limitations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the aesthetic outcome of iris reconstruction using an artificial iris (AI). In this study, 82 eyes of 79 consecutive patients with mostly traumatic partial or total aniridia that underwent iris reconstruction surgery using a custom-made silicone AI (HumanOptics, Erlangen, Germany). Pre- and postoperative photographs of 66 patients were analysed subjectively and objectively. Subjective evaluation was based questionnaires. Objective evaluation included measurement of pupil centration and iris colour analysis. Averaged hues from iris areas were transferred to numerical values using the LAB-colour-system. Single parameters and overall difference value (ΔE) were compared between AI and remaining iris (RI), as well as AI and fellow eye iris (FI). Patients, eye doctors and laymen rated the overall aesthetic outcome with 8.9 ±1.4, 7.7 ±1.1 and 7.3 ±1.1 out of 10 points, respectively. Mean AI decentration was 0.35 ±0.24 mm. Better pupil centration correlated with a higher overall score for aesthetic outcome (p<0.05). The AI was on average 4.65 ±10 points brighter than RI and FI. Aniridia treatment using a custom-made artificial iris prosthesis offers a good aesthetic outcome. Pupil centration was a key factor that correlated with the amount of aesthetic satisfaction. The AI was on average slightly brighter than the RI and FI.

Residual Iris Retraction Syndrome After Artificial Iris Implantation.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of an artificial iris implant on the remnant iris. DESIGN: Interventional case series. METHODS: Setting: Single center. PATIENT POPULATION: Forty-two consecutive patients. OBSERVATION PROCEDURES: Morphologic evaluation over 24 ± 14 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Remnant pupillary aperture, iris color, visual acuity, intraocular pressure, and endothelial cell count. RESULTS: In 7 of 42 cases (16.7%), the residual iris aperture dilated from 36.6 ± 15.4 mm2 preoperatively to 61.1 ± 12.5 mm2 1 year postoperatively (66.9% increase). In 5 of 7 affected eyes the artificial iris had been implanted into the ciliary sulcus; in 2 eyes it had been sutured to the sclera. Four of the 7 patients presented with remarkable complications: 2 eyes needed glaucoma shunt surgeries owing to pigment dispersion; 1 suffered from recurrent bleedings; and in 1 case artificial iris explantation was performed owing to chronic inflammation. Anterior chamber depth and angle, endothelial cell count, and visual acuity did not change in this cohort. Changes in color were not observed in the remnant iris. CONCLUSIONS: The implantation of an artificial iris prosthesis can lead to a residual iris retraction syndrome. It is likely that residual iris is trapped in the fissure between the artificial iris and the anterior chamber angle, preventing further pupil constriction. Another possibility could be a constriction or atrophy of the residual iris. A scleral-sutured implant and an implantation in the capsular bag were both found to prevent the iris retraction. The study group number is inadequate to allow statistical comparison of these different implantation methods. As the use of artificial irises increases, we may expect more patients with iris retraction syndrome in the future.

Switch to aflibercept or ranibizumab after initial treatment with bevacizumab in eyes with neovascular AMD.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate changes in central macular thickness (CMT) and visual outcome in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) treated initially with bevacizumab and subsequently switched to either aflibercept or ranibizumab. METHODS: Observational clinical study was performed. We measured the structural outcome (CMT on SD-OCT; µm) and the visual outcome (best corrected visual acuity (BCVA); logMAR), as follows: before treatment (at baseline), following bevacizumab treatment (switch follow-up) and after switching from bevacizumab to aflibercept- or ranibizumab treatment (final follow-up, AG/, RG). RESULTS: From a total of 96 eyes treated with intravitreal injections of bevacizumab (10.5 ± 7.6 (mean ± SD)), 58 eyes switched to aflibercept (6.5 ± 3.9; AG) and 38 eyes switched to ranibizumab (7.1 ± 5.3; RG) (≥ 3 injections, each). In addition, these eyes were compared to 37 eyes under bevacizumab monotherapy. PRIMARY OUTCOME: In the AG, the CMT decreased slightly from 430 ± 220 µm at baseline to 419 ± 212 µm at switch follow-up (p = 0.86), but decreased significantly to 318 ± 159 µm at final follow-up, AG (p < 0.0001). In the ranibizumab group (RG), the CMT increased from 396 ± 174 µm at baseline to 499 ± 333 µm at switch follow-up (p = 0.012), but decreased significantly to 394 ± 202 µm at final follow-up, RG (p = 0.007). Secondary outcome: In the AG, the mean BCVA worsened from logMAR 0.57 ± 0.33 at baseline to 0.63 ± 0.30 at switch follow-up and improved slightly to 0.53 ± 0.71 at final follow-up, AG (p = 0.46). In the RG, mean BCVA worsened from 0.57 ± 0.28 at baseline to 0.64 ± 0.31 at switch follow-up and improved slightly to 0.60 ± 0.36 at final follow-up, RG (p = 0.64). CONCLUSION: Switching from bevacizumab to either aflibercept, or ranibizumab, has a strong anatomical effect in eyes with neovascular AMD. Nevertheless, even if the switch to aflibercept shows a minimal functional benefit over that to ranibizumab, visual prognosis remains limited.