Anterior capsule cover and axial movement of intraocular lens

Purpose To measure optic shift (OS) of a single piece monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) with varying relationships between anterior capsule cover and IOL optic. Methods This is a prospective randomized masked study of 150 eyes undergoing phacoemulsification. Eyes received either option: 360 o total c...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Eye (London) 2008-08, Vol.22 (8), p.1015-1023
Hauptverfasser: Nanavaty, M A, Raj, S M, Vasavada, V A, Vasavada, A R
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose To measure optic shift (OS) of a single piece monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) with varying relationships between anterior capsule cover and IOL optic. Methods This is a prospective randomized masked study of 150 eyes undergoing phacoemulsification. Eyes received either option: 360 o total capsule cover (group I); partial cover (group II); or no cover (group III). OS was calculated as difference in anterior chamber depth after administration of cyclopentolate 1% and pilocarpine 2% on IOLMaster ® at separate visits at 6 months follow-up. Subsequently, using retro-illumination photographs, percentage area of capsule cover was calculated. OS within and between groups I and II was analyzed. The impact of one quartile change in area of capsule cover on percentage change in OS was measured for both groups. Unpaired t -test, correlation, and regression were applied. Results In groups I, II, and III, mean age of patients was 56.68±6.38, 57.09±7.34, 59.15±6.35 years, respectively; mean OS (mm) was 1.25±0.28, 1.20±0.24; 0.95±0.26 ( P =0.013), respectively; and percentage area of capsule cover (%) was 47.35±10.48, 33.83±10.11, 0.16±0.13 ( P =0.001), respectively. Mean percentage area of capsule cover in group I vs group II was significant ( P =0.001). OS was 1.22±0.26 mm in groups I and II (combined) vs 0.95±0.26 mm in group III ( P =0.004, (0.06, 0.33)). OS in group I vs group II was not significant ( P =0.46). Correlation coefficient was r =0.38 ( P
ISSN:0950-222X
1476-5454
DOI:10.1038/sj.eye.6702817