Search

Purpose: To investigate the effect of scleral tunnel length on the effective lens position and tilt of the intraocular lens (IOL) in flanged intrascleral haptic fixation (ISHF) using anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT)., Setting: Tertiary institution., Design: Retrospective case-control study., Methods: This study included 55 and 42 eyes that underwent ISHF with 1.0 and 2.0 mm scleral tunnels, respectively. 23 eyes that underwent sutured fixation were used as a control. The anterior chamber depth (ACD), scleral tunnel length, incident angle of haptic, and tilting of optic were analyzed using AS-OCT., Results: The mean postoperative ACD, vertical tilt angle, and spherical equivalent of the 1.0 mm were 5.27 ± 0.39 mm, 6.04 ± 4.87 degrees, and 0.38 ± 1.03 diopters, respectively. The ACD and vertical tilt angle of the 1.0 mm were larger than those of the others ( P < .001 and P < .05, respectively), and the postoperative spherical equivalent was more hyperopic ( P < .05). The 2.0 mm exhibited a lower frequency of tilting greater than 7 degrees. The intereye difference in ACD between in-the-bag fixation and ISHF of the 1.0 mm tunnel was significantly greater than that in the 2.0 mm tunnel ( P < .05). The 1.0 mm tunnel had a significantly larger incident angle and a longer tunnel length ( P < .001, respectively) and showed a greater difference in the tunnel length on both sides ( P < .05)., Conclusions: A shorter tunnel yielded a more unstable IOL position, greater variation in angle and tunnel length, and longer ACD during ISHF. An exact 2.0 mm tunnel must be created on both sides to achieve a stable and predictable IOL position., (Copyright © 2024 Published by Wolters Kluwer on behalf of ASCRS and ESCRS.)

Purpose: To assess the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in different age groups using various IOL calculation formulas., Methods: Data from 421 eyes of 421 patients ≥60 years old (ages: 60-69, n = 131; 70-74, n = 105; 75-84, n = 158 and ≥85, n = 27), who underwent uneventful cataract surgery with SN60WF IOL implantation at John A. Moran Eye Center, Salt Lake City, USA, were retrospectively obtained. The SD of the prediction error (PE), median and mean absolute PEs and the percentage of eyes within ±0.25, ±0.50, ±0.75 and ±1.00 D were calculated after constant optimizations for the following formulas: Barrett Universal II (BUII), Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) 2.0, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Hoffer QST, Holladay 1, Kane, Radial Basis Function (RBF) 3.0 and SRK/T. Results were compared between the different age groups., Results: Predictability rates within 0.25D were lower for the eldest age group compared with the other groups using the EVO 2.0 (33% vs. 37%-53%, p = 0.045), Kane (26% vs. 35%-50%, p = 0.034) and SRK/T (22% vs. 31%-49%, p = 0.002). Higher median absolute refractive errors for all formulas were observed in the oldest group [range: 0.39 D (Haigis, Hoffer QSR)-0.48 D (Kane)], followed by the youngest group [range: 0.30 D (RBF 3.0)-0.39 D (Holladay 1, SRK/T)] but did not reach statistical significance. No significant differences between the groups in the distribution parameter were seen., Conclusion: Current IOL power calculation formulas may have variable accuracy for different age groups. This should be taken into account when planning cataract surgery to improve refractive outcomes., (© 2023 Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Purpose of Review: Light adjustable intraocular lens (LAL) is a promising concept in cataract surgery. This review explores considerations for the use of LALs., Recent Findings: Through updates, the safety of LALs and light delivery devices have been enhanced, enabling more efficient treatment with lower ultraviolet (UV) energy. Preoperative topography and aberration are essential for understanding indications for LALs. Furthermore, when determining intraocular lens power, it is crucial to factor in potential postoperative myopia or hyperopic adjustments. This is achieved by establishing a proper postimplantation refractive target and considering potential wavefront changes. Postoperative adjustments for defocus and astigmatism have demonstrated excellent outcomes. Monovision strategy by adjustable blended vision of LALs revealed distance vision of 20/20 along with near vision of J2 in 96% of patients. However, the results of clinical studies on postrefractive cataract surgery showed contrasting outcomes at distance, indicating the need for further research results regarding its effectiveness. A new postoperative workflow needs to be designed to enable a systematic follow-up process., Summary: LALs are safe and demonstrate promising refractive outcomes. To achieve appropriate results, understanding the changes in optical characteristics associated with adjustment and constructing a new postoperative workflow are necessary., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To analyze the cost-effectiveness of the Light Adjustable Lens (LAL; RxSight) in comparison to a monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) for individuals undergoing cataract surgery in both eyes., Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using a Markov model that simulated the patient outcomes and costs associated with undergoing cataract surgery with the LAL or monofocal IOL. Cost-effectiveness was determined using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), a measure that quantifies the incremental cost in dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Treatments with the ICER below the willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of $50,000/QALY were considered cost-effective. The model was also evaluated for the impact of uncertainties in parameters using one-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses., Results: The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the LAL is cost-effective compared to monofocal IOLs in patients undergoing cataract surgery, with ICERs of $9,792/QALY (health care perspective) and $10,072/QALY (societal perspective) both significantly below the WTP. The model was most sensitive to patient age, market cost of the LAL, and proportion of patients with residual astigmatism following cataract surgery. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that cataract surgeries in patients starting at age 65 years were cost-effective in 94% of the simulations at a WTP of $50,000/QALY., Conclusions: From both health care and societal perspectives, the study shows cataract surgeries performed with the LAL are cost-effective when compared to those performed with a monofocal IOL. More studies are needed to compare the LAL to other premium lenses that also provide patients with excellent visual outcomes at a higher cost. [ J Refract Surg . 2023;39(11):777-782.] .

Purpose: To develop a mathematical model that can predict the amount of refractive change caused by implantation of an intraocular lens (IOL) in a reversed position during cataract surgery., Methods: A theoretical mathematical formula based on the Gullstrand eye model was constructed to estimate the refractive change of the eye after implantation of a reversed IOL. The refractive change caused by implantation of the IOL in a reversed position was calculated based on the exchange of the anterior curvature with the posterior curvature of the IOL, and the lengthening of the distance between the IOL and the retina. In case of a three-piece IOL with angulation, the amount of refractive change was calculated based on its angle and the total refractive power of the eye, which is dependent on the focal length of the eye., Results: Calculated refractive change for one-piece IOLs was less than 0.10 diopter (D). For three-piece IOLs, the calculated refractive change makes the eye on average 0.77 D more myopic and can increase with the total refractive power of the patient's eye. The mathematical model was applied to seven previously published cases of reverse IOL implantation., Conclusions: This calculation demonstrates that with an upside-down IOL, there is a small refractive change in the one-piece IOL, including a toric IOL without angulation, but there can be a large refractive change in the three-piece IOL with angulation, especially using a higher power IOL or with a shorter axial length. [ J Refract Surg . 2023;39(5):326-331.] .

Purpose of Review: We review recent studies comparing intraocular lens (IOL) formulas with an emphasis on selection of the highest performing formulas based on patient axial length, age, and history of previous corneal refractive surgery., Recent Findings: The Barrett Universal II formula based on a theoretical model has consistently demonstrated high accuracy. The Olsen four-factor formula using ray tracing optics and the Hill-RBF calculator using artificial intelligence have also demonstrated good prediction results after being updated. Notably, the Kane formula, incorporating artificial intelligence, has overall shown the best performance for all axial lengths. Although newly developed and updated IOL formulas have improved refractive prediction in patients with short or long axial length eyes or prior history of corneal refractive surgery, these challenging cases still require special consideration. The Barrett True-K formula has shown accurate results regardless of preoperative data in eyes with previous myopic refractive surgery., Summary: Advancements in optical biometry and IOL calculation formulas continue to improve refractive outcomes. The clinician can optimize refractive outcomes in the majority of patients with the use of formulas that have shown consistent results and accuracy in several large studies., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess the accuracy of the Kane formula for intraocualr lens (IOL) power calculation in comparison with established formulas in the elderly population., Setting: Shiley Eye Institute, University of California San Diego, USA., Design: Retrospective cohort., Methods: Retrospective data from 90 patients (90 eyes) aged 75 years or older who underwent uneventful cataract surgery with SN60WF intraocular lens (IOL) implantation were evaluated. The first operated eyes of patients with final corrected distance visual acuity 20/40 or better and axial length 22 to 26 mm were included. Prediction errors were calculated for Barrett Universal (BU) II, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Kane, and SRK/T formulas. A subgroup analysis based on age (75-84 and ≥85 years old) was performed., Results: Use of both BUII and Kane formulas resulted in the highest percentage of eyes with prediction errors within ±0.50 diopters (D) (72% each) and significantly higher than Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T (P = .001). Rates of predictability within ±0.25 D and ±1.00 D were 31% to 38% and 87% to 92%, respectively, with no significant differences between formulas. No statistically significant difference was seen between formulas in the median absolute error. These tendencies remained consistent in both age groups when analyzed separately. Subgroup analysis showed better predictability of all formulas in the younger age group., Conclusions: To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study evaluating the Kane formula exclusively in the elderly population. The Kane formula was found to be of equal accuracy to the BUII and superior to the Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T formulas. Very elderly patients might have reduced refractive precision using all formulas.

Background/objectives: To analyze the refractive predictability and outcomes of cataract surgery in the very elderly (≥85 years old)., Subjects/methods: A retrospective case-series performed at the Shiley Eye Institute, University of California San Diego, USA. Electronically pulled data of 2444 surgeries revealed 147 surgeries on 133 very elderly patients. Chart review was conducted for all very elderly and corresponding control patients (75-84 years old). The first operated eyes of patients with final best-corrected visual acuity ≥20/40, axial length (AL) 22-26 mm, and implanted SN60WF IOL were included. Patients with ocular comorbidities and/or intra- or post-operative complications were excluded. Prediction errors of refractive outcome and percentage of eyes within ±0.50D and ±1.00D were compared between the groups for the Holladay 1 and Barrett Universal II (Barrett) formulas. Logistic regression analysis for achievement of ±1.00D was conducted., Results: Final analysis included 90 eyes (n = 44, very elderly, n = 46, control patients). Median absolute refractive error (MedAE) with Holladay 1, but not Barrett formula, was significantly higher in the older group (p = 0.02 and p = 0.07, respectively). The MedAE in the older group was lower using the Barrett compared to Holladay 1 (p = 0.02). Fewer older patients than younger patients achieved refraction within ±0.50D and ±1.00D from goal, using the Holladay 1 (p = 0.049 and p = 0.002 respectively). Logistic regression analysis supported the relationship between Holladay 1 predictive refractive error of >1.00D and patient's age (p = 0.046)., Conclusions: Very elderly patients undergoing cataract surgery may be prone to reduced refractive precision, particularly with utilization of the Holladay 1 formula.

Purpose: To determine the cost-effectiveness of multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) compared to that of monofocal IOLs from a societal and health care sector perspective., Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis., Methods: A Markov model was constructed that simulated patients who received either multifocal or monofocal IOLs during cataract surgery. Postoperatively, patients could experience spectacle dependence, glare, and haloes. Cost-effectiveness was determined by measuring the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) as the incremental cost in dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Treatments with an ICER below the standard willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $50,000/QALY were considered cost effective. One-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate model sensitivity to cost, utilities, and other model inputs., Results: Multifocal IOLs were associated with a 0.71 QALY increase at an increased cost of $3,415 compared with monofocal IOLs, leading to an ICER of $4,805/QALY from the societal and health care sector perspectives. The cost-effectiveness model was most sensitive to patient age, probability of spectacle dependence with multifocal IOLs and monofocal IOLs, and the disutility of glasses. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found multifocal IOLs to be the cost-effective option compared with monofocal IOLs 99.9% of the time at a WTP threshold of $50,000/QALY., Conclusions: From a societal and health care perspective, multifocal IOLs would be considered a cost-effective strategy compared to monofocal IOLs for patients who desire a higher chance to be spectacle-free. However, more studies need to be conducted to further evaluate the efficacy of multifocal IOLs., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose of Review: The purpose of this study is to review and evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of blue light (400-480 nm) filtering intraocular lenses (IOLs) when compared with the ultraviolet (UV)-blocking IOLs., Recent Findings: Theories that blue light could be related to the pathogenesis of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) have led to the use of yellow tinted IOLs in cataract surgery to filter short wavelength light. In spite of the potential benefits, some concerns have been raised. The potential advantages of the blue light filtering IOLs are that they could better mimic the conditions of phakia and therefore be more protective for the retina in decreasing the incidence of AMD. However, the potential disadvantages are that blue light filtering could negatively affect scotopic vision and circadian rhythms in older patients., Summary: These advantages and disadvantages of blue light filtering IOLs have not been proven clinically and thus many questions remain. Studies have shown that each type of IOL may have its own benefits and the type of IOL should be picked on the basis of patients' specific situations. In cataract surgery, considerations such as preexisting AMD, night vision problems or sleep problems may be considered with the choice of IOL.

Purpose of Review: There is a growing number of patients who wish to remain spectacle independent after cataract surgery, and this number includes some of the millions of people worldwide who have undergone laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). This article reviews the evidence of the use of presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs) in patients who have previously undergone LASIK., Recent Findings: Small studies have demonstrated that the use of hybrid refractive-diffractive multifocal IOLs in eyes with previous myopic or hyperopic LASIK can result in good refractive results. However, refractive surprise can be common and may require further intervention, such as laser surgery enhancement, to achieve satisfactory results. The use of these IOLs can also result in lost lines of vision, and visual quality may be poorer under mesopic or glare conditions. No reports were found regarding the use of accommodating IOLs in such patients., Summary: There is a surprising paucity of literature on this topic, given the millions that have undergone LASIK. Further and timelier research is needed to assess the use of newer multifocal and accommodating IOLs in post-LASIK eyes, the effect of IOL asphericity on visual quality, and patients' experience, satisfaction and level of spectacle independence after surgery.

Purpose: To evaluate complications and clinical outcomes of Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty in eyes with preexisting anterior chamber intraocular lenses., Design: Retrospective review., Methods: Thirty-one patients who underwent Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty and who had a preexisting anterior chamber intraocular lens were identified from May 2006 through March 2009. Patient follow-up ranged from a minimum of 1 month up to 30 months. Preoperative and postoperative best spectacle-corrected visual acuity, manifest refraction, comorbid conditions, and complications were recorded. Endothelial cell loss, graft dislocation, graft failure rates were calculated., Results: The mean age at surgery was 78 ± 9 years (range, 53 to 91 years). All eyes had pseudophakic bullous keratopathy, except 1 patient who had a failed penetrating keratoplasty graft. Excluding those patients with severely limited visual potential because of noncorneal pathologic features, the mean best spectacle-corrected visual acuity improved significantly from 20/200 to 20/400 before surgery to 20/63 at 3 months (P < .0001), 20/60 at 6 months (P = .0006), 20/50 at 12 to 15 months (n = 10; P = .004), and 20/40 between 23 and 30 months (n = 8; median, 25 months; P = .007). The preoperative mean spherical equivalent was -0.3 ± 1.8 diopters compared with -0.15 ± 1.5 diopters after surgery (P = .78). The graft dislocation rate was 13%, and the graft failure rate was 16%. For those patients with endothelial cell density data available, the average endothelial cell loss was 48% at a mean of 14 months., Conclusions: Although Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty surgery in patients with an anterior chamber intraocular lens remains a controversial topic, the visual and anatomic outcomes from this limited study support this approach as a surgical option in selected cases., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)