后瞳孔虹膜固定与缝合巩膜固定眼内透镜。

Rozaliya Hristova, Denitsa Cholakova, Alexander Oscar, Bogumil Wowra, Dimitar Dzhelebov, Yani Zdravkov
{"title":"后瞳孔虹膜固定与缝合巩膜固定眼内透镜。","authors":"Rozaliya Hristova, Denitsa Cholakova, Alexander Oscar, Bogumil Wowra, Dimitar Dzhelebov, Yani Zdravkov","doi":"10.22336/rjo.2024.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> To compare the anatomical and functional results and patient satisfaction following retropupillary implantation of Artisan Aphakia iris-fixated intraocular lens (rAAIF) and sutured scleral fixated intraocular lens (SFIOL). <b>Subjects and methods:</b> We presented a prospective double-arm non-blinded study. Forty-one eyes with acquired aphakia, no age-related macular degeneration, no previous keratoplasty, no combined procedures, no AC reaction (cells, fibrin), normal intraocular pressure, no history of endothelial corneal dystrophy in relatives or fellow eye were included. Indications, complications, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), endothelial cell density (ECD), and patient satisfaction score were assessed. <b>Results:</b> Retropupillary AAIF was implanted in 21 (51.22%) eyes and SFIOL in 20 (48.78%) eyes. The most common indication was complicated cataract surgery in 18 cases (43.90%), followed by trauma in 16 (39.02%), and spontaneous dislocation in 7 (17.07%). No difference between rAAIF and SFIOL in terms of sex, laterality (χ=0.13, <i>p</i>=0.72), indications (χ=0.78, <i>p</i>=0.68), previous ocular history, and comorbidities was observed. The complications and the visual outcomes at 6 months postoperatively were similar between the two groups (<i>p</i>=0.95 and <i>p</i>=0.321, respectively). The ECD loss in the two groups was also similar (<i>p</i>=0.89). The patient satisfaction score was 58.67±8.80 in the rAAIF and 56.69±11.50 in the SFIOL group, which was statistically similar (<i>p</i>=0.764). <b>Conclusion:</b> Retropupillary AAIF and SFIOL showed similar results concerning visual acuity, endothelial cell loss, and patient satisfaction. Careful preoperative individual assessment is required to have optimal results with either technique. <b>Abbreviations:</b> AAIF = Artisan Aphakia iris-fixated intraocular lens, rAAIF = retropupillary Artisan Aphakia iris-fixated intraocular lens, CDVA = corrected distance visual acuity, ECD = endothelial cell density, IOL = intraocular lens, SD = standard deviation, SFIOL = scleral fixated intraocular lens.</p>","PeriodicalId":94355,"journal":{"name":"Romanian journal of ophthalmology","volume":"68 1","pages":"13-18"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11007560/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retropupillary Iris-fixated versus Sutured Scleral-fixated Intraocular Lenses.\",\"authors\":\"Rozaliya Hristova, Denitsa Cholakova, Alexander Oscar, Bogumil Wowra, Dimitar Dzhelebov, Yani Zdravkov\",\"doi\":\"10.22336/rjo.2024.04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> To compare the anatomical and functional results and patient satisfaction following retropupillary implantation of Artisan Aphakia iris-fixated intraocular lens (rAAIF) and sutured scleral fixated intraocular lens (SFIOL). <b>Subjects and methods:</b> We presented a prospective double-arm non-blinded study. Forty-one eyes with acquired aphakia, no age-related macular degeneration, no previous keratoplasty, no combined procedures, no AC reaction (cells, fibrin), normal intraocular pressure, no history of endothelial corneal dystrophy in relatives or fellow eye were included. Indications, complications, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), endothelial cell density (ECD), and patient satisfaction score were assessed. <b>Results:</b> Retropupillary AAIF was implanted in 21 (51.22%) eyes and SFIOL in 20 (48.78%) eyes. The most common indication was complicated cataract surgery in 18 cases (43.90%), followed by trauma in 16 (39.02%), and spontaneous dislocation in 7 (17.07%). No difference between rAAIF and SFIOL in terms of sex, laterality (χ=0.13, <i>p</i>=0.72), indications (χ=0.78, <i>p</i>=0.68), previous ocular history, and comorbidities was observed. The complications and the visual outcomes at 6 months postoperatively were similar between the two groups (<i>p</i>=0.95 and <i>p</i>=0.321, respectively). The ECD loss in the two groups was also similar (<i>p</i>=0.89). The patient satisfaction score was 58.67±8.80 in the rAAIF and 56.69±11.50 in the SFIOL group, which was statistically similar (<i>p</i>=0.764). <b>Conclusion:</b> Retropupillary AAIF and SFIOL showed similar results concerning visual acuity, endothelial cell loss, and patient satisfaction. Careful preoperative individual assessment is required to have optimal results with either technique. <b>Abbreviations:</b> AAIF = Artisan Aphakia iris-fixated intraocular lens, rAAIF = retropupillary Artisan Aphakia iris-fixated intraocular lens, CDVA = corrected distance visual acuity, ECD = endothelial cell density, IOL = intraocular lens, SD = standard deviation, SFIOL = scleral fixated intraocular lens.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94355,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Romanian journal of ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\"68 1\",\"pages\":\"13-18\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11007560/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Romanian journal of ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22336/rjo.2024.04\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Romanian journal of ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22336/rjo.2024.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较瞳孔后植入 Artisan Aphakia 虹膜固定眼内透镜(rAAIF)和缝合巩膜固定眼内透镜(SFIOL)后的解剖和功能效果以及患者满意度。研究对象和方法:我们进行了一项前瞻性双臂非盲研究。研究对象包括 41 只患后天性无晶体眼、无年龄相关性黄斑变性、未进行过角膜移植手术、未进行过联合手术、无 AC 反应(细胞、纤维蛋白)、眼压正常、亲属或同眼无内皮角膜营养不良病史的眼睛。对适应症、并发症、矫正远视力(CDVA)、内皮细胞密度(ECD)和患者满意度评分进行了评估。结果:21眼(51.22%)植入了瞳孔后AAIF,20眼(48.78%)植入了SFIOL。最常见的适应症是复杂的白内障手术(18 例,占 43.90%),其次是外伤(16 例,占 39.02%)和自发脱位(7 例,占 17.07%)。在性别、侧位(χ=0.13,P=0.72)、适应症(χ=0.78,P=0.68)、既往眼病史和合并症方面,rAAIF 和 SFIOL 均无差异。两组的并发症和术后 6 个月的视觉效果相似(分别为 p=0.95 和 p=0.321)。两组的 ECD 损失也相似(P=0.89)。rAAIF组患者满意度为(58.67±8.80)分,SFIOL组患者满意度为(56.69±11.50)分,在统计学上相似(P=0.764)。结论视网膜后AAIF和SFIOL在视力、内皮细胞损失和患者满意度方面显示出相似的结果。无论采用哪种技术,都需要进行仔细的术前个体评估,以获得最佳效果。缩写:AAIF = Artisan Aphakia 虹膜固定眼内透镜,rAAIF = retropupillary Artisan Aphakia 虹膜固定眼内透镜,CDVA = 矫正距离视力,ECD = 内皮细胞密度,IOL = 眼内透镜,SD = 标准偏差,SFIOL = 巩膜固定眼内透镜。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Retropupillary Iris-fixated versus Sutured Scleral-fixated Intraocular Lenses.

Aim: To compare the anatomical and functional results and patient satisfaction following retropupillary implantation of Artisan Aphakia iris-fixated intraocular lens (rAAIF) and sutured scleral fixated intraocular lens (SFIOL). Subjects and methods: We presented a prospective double-arm non-blinded study. Forty-one eyes with acquired aphakia, no age-related macular degeneration, no previous keratoplasty, no combined procedures, no AC reaction (cells, fibrin), normal intraocular pressure, no history of endothelial corneal dystrophy in relatives or fellow eye were included. Indications, complications, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), endothelial cell density (ECD), and patient satisfaction score were assessed. Results: Retropupillary AAIF was implanted in 21 (51.22%) eyes and SFIOL in 20 (48.78%) eyes. The most common indication was complicated cataract surgery in 18 cases (43.90%), followed by trauma in 16 (39.02%), and spontaneous dislocation in 7 (17.07%). No difference between rAAIF and SFIOL in terms of sex, laterality (χ=0.13, p=0.72), indications (χ=0.78, p=0.68), previous ocular history, and comorbidities was observed. The complications and the visual outcomes at 6 months postoperatively were similar between the two groups (p=0.95 and p=0.321, respectively). The ECD loss in the two groups was also similar (p=0.89). The patient satisfaction score was 58.67±8.80 in the rAAIF and 56.69±11.50 in the SFIOL group, which was statistically similar (p=0.764). Conclusion: Retropupillary AAIF and SFIOL showed similar results concerning visual acuity, endothelial cell loss, and patient satisfaction. Careful preoperative individual assessment is required to have optimal results with either technique. Abbreviations: AAIF = Artisan Aphakia iris-fixated intraocular lens, rAAIF = retropupillary Artisan Aphakia iris-fixated intraocular lens, CDVA = corrected distance visual acuity, ECD = endothelial cell density, IOL = intraocular lens, SD = standard deviation, SFIOL = scleral fixated intraocular lens.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Optical Density and Polarized Light Microscopy to confirm calcification of Intra-ocular Lens. Progression of corneal thinning and melting after collagen cross-linking for keratoconus. Protecting vision with intraoperative visual evoked potentials and tractography in transcortical brain tumor surgery. A Brief Review on Adult-Onset Coats' Disease. A neural network model for predicting the effectiveness of treatment in patients with neovascular glaucoma associated with diabetes mellitus.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1