Intrastromal Corneal Ring Segment Implantation Followed by Simultaneous Topography-Guided Photorefractive Keratectomy and Corneal Cross-Linking for Contact Lens-Intolerant Keratoconus.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Keraring implantation followed by simultaneous topography-guided photorefractive keratectomy (TGPRK) and corneal cross-linking (CXL) in the management of keratoconus. METHODS: This is a single-center, private practice, retrospective review. Patients with keratoconus who were intolerant to contact lens wear underwent implantation of the Keraring, followed by TGPRK with CXL from 2 to 36 months after implantation. Main outcome measures were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), refraction (cylinder and spherical equivalent), keratometry (steep, maximum, and central), and central corneal thickness (CCT). Patients were followed up for 3 to 60 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Fifty-seven eyes from 45 patients were included. The mean time between Keraring and TGPRK/CXL was 6.0 ± 6.0 months. Patients were followed up for a mean of 28.6 ± 20.1 months after Keraring insertion. At 12-month follow-up, there was a statistically significant improvement in mean UDVA (0.94 ± 0.49-0.35 ± 0.23, P < 0.01), CDVA (0.39 ± 0.26-0.17 ± 0.15, P < 0.01), cylinder (-4.97 ± 2.68 to -1.74 ± 1.25, P < 0.01), steep keratometry (51.25 ± 3.37-45.03 ± 2.27, P < 0.01), central keratometry (52.59 ± 4.98-46.99 ± 3.53, P < 0.01), and maximum keratometry (58.78 ± 4.22-50.76 ± 3.42, P < 0.01). These results were sustained at 48-month follow-up. CCT decreased at 12 months after TGPRK (461.84 ± 27.46-418.94 ± 45.62, P < 0.01) and remained stable at 60 months. Postoperatively, 2 eyes (3.51%) had corneal haze, resulting in decrease in CDVA; 1 was treated successfully with repeat PRK; and 1 patient (1.75%) had wound melt due to partial Keraring extrusion, which settled with repositioning. CONCLUSIONS: Keraring implantation followed by simultaneous TGPRK and CXL appears to be effective in the long term in improving UDVA, CDVA, cylinder, CCT, and keratometry in patients with keratoconus who are intolerant to contact lenses.

Adjustment of anterior corneal astigmatism values to incorporate the likely effect of posterior corneal curvature for toric intraocular lens calculation.

PURPOSE: To establish if average refractive overcorrection or undercorrection of corneal astigmatism based on the "rule" of the astigmatism occurs if toric intraocular lenses (IOLs) are calculated on the basis of anterior corneal measurements, and to calculate an adjustment for individual eyes to avoid this systematic error. METHODS: One hundred forty-three consecutive eyes of 115 patients underwent phacoemulsification with IOL powers calculated using anterior corneal curvature data alone. Eyes were grouped as either "with-the-rule" or "against-the-rule" on the basis of the steep anterior corneal meridian. Targeted versus achieved astigmatic outcomes were compared. Main outcome measure was residual refractive astigmatism following the insertion of a toric IOL due to the likely effect of posterior corneal astigmatism. RESULTS: Significant prediction errors in astigmatic outcome occurred only with IOL cylinders of 2 diopters or less. Overcorrection occurred by a factor of 1.38 in with-the-rule eyes and undercorrection occurred by a factor of 0.65 in against-the-rule eyes. CONCLUSIONS: A coefficient of adjustment of 0.75 for with-the-rule eyes and 1.41 for against-the-rule eyes can be applied to the corneal astigmatism power value to calculate a more appropriate IOL cylinder power than that calculated by using unadjusted anterior corneal curvature measurements. These adjustment coefficients apply only to those eyes that would have received IOLs with 2 diopters of cylinder or less and calculated with such unadjusted measurements. Greater IOL cylinder powers are sufficiently accurately calculated using unadjusted values.

Objective accommodation measurement of the Crystalens HD compared to monofocal intraocular lenses.

PURPOSE: Objective evaluation of accommodation with a bilateral accommodating intraocular lens (IOL) versus monofocal IOLs. METHODS: Patients received accommodating IOL (Crystalens HD; Bausch & Lomb, Rochester, NY) bilaterally after cataract surgery. These were compared to a matched group receiving monofocal IOLs. Preoperative and postoperative distance corrected distance, intermediate, and near vision were evaluated. Objective accommodation was measured with the WAM-5500 Binocular Autorefractor/Keratometer (Grand Seiko, Pty Ltd., Hiroshima, Japan). RESULTS: Nineteen patients were included. Ten received the Crystalens HD in both eyes and nine received one of three monofocal lenses in each eye. Mean postoperative distance corrected distance visual acuity was not statistically different between the two groups. Mean distance corrected intermediate vision was better in the Crystalens HD group (logMAR 0.24 ± 0.11 [control], logMAR 0.11 ± 0.10 [Crystalens HD], P = .033). The groups did not differ significantly for mean distance corrected near vision (logMAR 0.54 ± 0.12 [control], logMAR 0.42 ± 0.15 [Crystalens HD], P = .087). However, a significantly greater proportion of Crystalens HD eyes achieved 0.4 or 0.3 logMAR for near wearing their distance correction (P = .013). With distance correction, the mean spherical equivalent failed to show any myopia with accommodative effort in either group. Low contrast and low luminance contrast acuity were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: The Crystalens HD showed some benefit for intermediate visual function compared to the monofocal IOLs with both groups wearing full correction for distance. There were no significant signs of accommodation in either group.

Hyaluronidase toxicity: a possible cause of postoperative periorbital inflammation.

BACKGROUND: Periorbital inflammation following regional anaesthesia is commonly attributed to hyaluronidase allergy. This case series suggests an alternative explanation in some patients. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. PARTICIPANTS: Seven patients presenting with postoperative non-infectious periorbital inflammation following peribulbar or sub-tenons anaesthesia, presenting at four different institutions, are described. METHODS: Data on patient demographics, operative data, clinical presentation, treatment and allergy testing were collected among the four institutions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Response to treatment and allergy testing were noted among the patients included in this study. RESULTS: Seven patients (five female) underwent uneventful phacoemulsification under a peribulbar or sub-tenon's block, all including hyaluronidase with concentrations ranging 50-250 IU/mL. The onset of inflammatory symptoms and signs varied from 12 h to 3 days after the surgery. The most common form of presentation was lid swelling and chemosis. Patients were treated with oral corticosteroids, with good clinical response. Four patients underwent skin prick and intradermal testing to the local anaesthetic used, and to the suspect and a control hyaluronidase batch. The results were all negative, excluding allergy as the aetiology of this toxic periorbital syndrome, in at least these four patients. CONCLUSION: Hyaluronidase toxicity, potentially related to concentration of hyaluronidase, may be a cause of postoperative periorbital inflammation after cataract surgery, rather than hypersensitivity.