Clinical outcomes and comparison of intraocular lens calculation formulas in eyes with long axial myopia.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report the clinical and refractive outcomes of eyes with long axial length (AL) and high myopia that underwent cataract surgery and compare the performance of intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulae on these eyes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort included 183 eyes that underwent cataract surgery from January 2010 to December 2018. Demographics, AL, postoperative best-visual acuities, IOL power data, and postoperative complications were recorded. Refractive outcomes were analyzed and absolute predicted errors were compared between five IOL calculation formulas. RESULTS: The mean age included in the study was 65.4 ± 9.39 years with a mean AL of 26.76 ± 1.75 mm. Postoperatively, the mean sphere, cylinder, and manifest refraction spherical equivalent were 0.22 D ± 0.54, -0.78 D ± 0.50, and - 0.16 D ± 0.50, respectively. The average IOL power implanted was 11.12 D ± 4.59 D. No intraoperative complications were encountered, but there was one incidence of retinal tear with detachment reported postoperatively (0.55%). The Kane formula had the lowest mean absolute predicted error (MAE). A significant positive correlation between increasing AL and MAE was seen in the Sanders, Retzlaff and Kraft-Theoretical (SRK-T) and Ladas formulae but not statistically significant when the Kane, Barrett Universal II, and the Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) formulae were used. CONCLUSION: Cataract surgery in eyes with long ALs and high myopia is safe with a low incidence of intraoperative and postoperative complications. The Kane, Barrett, and EVO formulae were equally accurate in calculating the IOL power and achieved the least amount of residual error postoperatively.

Measurement of accommodative amplitude using wavefront aberrometer

@#<p style="font-size: 12.16px; text-align: justify;"><strong>OBJECTIVE:</strong> To measure and compare the accommodative amplitude of Filipino patients with different accommodative conditions using a wavefront aberrometer.</p> <p style="font-size: 12.16px; text-align: justify;"><strong>METHODS:</strong> A total of 120 eyes of 67 patients seen in a private eye center were included and divided into two groups (phakic and pseudophakic). After undergoing routine ophthalmologic examination that included manifest refraction and visual acuity testing, accomodative amplitude was measured using the iTraceTM wavefront aberrometer. Comparison of the measurements was made between the accommodative amplitude of phakic pre-presbyopes and presbyopes, and between eyes implanted with monofocal and accommodating intraocular lenses (IOLs).</p> <p style="font-size: 12.16px; text-align: justify;"><strong>RESULTS</strong>: The mean age of the pre-presbyopes was 27 years, presbyopes 50 years, monofocal IOL 69 years and accommodating IOL 67 years. The mean accommodative amplitude of the pre-presbyopes was 1.64 ± 1.06D, presbyopes 0.99 ± 0.42D, monofocal IOL 0.36 ± 1.16D, and accommodating IOL 0.94 ± 0.89D. The pre-presbyopes had a higher accommodative amplitude than the presbyopes (p=0.008), while the accommodating IOL subgroup had a higher amplitude than the monofocal IOL subgroup (p=0.02). Increasing age was correlated with decreasing amplitude in the phakic group (r2=0.926). There was no correlation between refractive error and amplitude of accommodation in the phakic and pseudophakic groups (r2=0.02 for both groups).</p> <p style="font-size: 12.16px; text-align: justify;"><strong>CONCLUSION:</strong> The wavefront aberrometer is a reliable tool in objectively measuring accommodative amplitude. Pre-presbyopes and accommodating IOLs were shown to have higher amplitudes of accommodation than presbyopes and monofocal IOLs.</p>

Comparison of the rotational stability of different toric intraocular lens implants

@#<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>OBJECTIVE:</strong> To compare the rotational stability and cylinder reduction of different toric intraocular lenses (IOLs).<br /><strong>METHOD:</strong> This was a prospective, cross-sectional study of 68 eyes that had at least 0.75 diopters (D) of corneal astigmatism prior to cataract surgery and were at least 3 months post-toric IOL implantation (Envista, AcrySof, FineVision). Patients recruited underwent visual acuity testing, manifest refraction, pupil dilation, and toric IOL axis determination. Actual axis position was obtained and compared to the intended axis calculated from the tonic IOL calculator. Any difference between the two was considered an axis deviation. Main outcome measures were postoperative deviation of the IOL axis from the intended axis, uncorrected distance visual acuity (LIDVA), best corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA), manifest refraction, and cylinder reduction.<br /><strong>RESULTS:</strong> There was no significant difference in the rotational stability of the three different types of toric IOLs (p=0.95). Mean axis deviation for .AcrySof, Envista, and FineVision were 2.43, 2.66, and 2.75 degrees, respectively. There was a significant decrease in the cylinder from preoperative to postoperative levels for all groups (p=0.00 for Envista, p=0.03 for AcrySof, and p=0.00 for Fine-Vision). There were significant improvements in the mean UCVA and BCDVA after cataract surgery and implantation of toric IOLs for all three groups.<br /><strong>CONCLUSION:</strong> The three IOL platforms (AcrySof, Envista, and FineVision) showed good rotational stability and significant cylinder reduction:Visual and refractive outcomes improved after surgery.<br /><br /></p>