English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Implantation of a single-piece-acrylic intraocular lens (SPA-IOL) in the ciliary sulcus during phacoemulsification complicated with posterior capsule tear (PCT) may be associated with severe complications. The purpose of this study was to report the efficacy and safety of sulcus implantation of a SPA-IOL, designed for both in-the-bag and sulcus positioning.    Methods  A prospective cross-sectional study including 12 patients, who underwent phacoemulsification with PCT and sulcus implantation of SPA-IOL designed for both in-the-bag and sulcus positioning (Seelens AF, Hanita, Israel) between January 2009 and March 2012 (follow-up 12–37 months). Preoperatively corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), subjective refraction and intraocular pressure (IOP) were recorded. Postoperative evaluation included anamnesis for IOL edge symptoms and transient visual obscurations (TVO) along with CDVA, subjective refraction IOP, anterior segment biomicroscopy, gonioscopy, assessment of IOL centration, fundus biomicroscopy and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography of the macula.    Results  Preoperatively, mean CDVA was 0.84 ± 0.60 LogMAR (Counting Finger-20/33) improving to 0.18 ± 0.13 LogMAR (20/40-20/20) at last examination (p = 0.004), as all the patients gained better CDVA. Mean preoperative spherical equivalent was −0.2 ± 2.5 Diopter (D) (−4.0D to +5.4D) reaching −1.9 ± 0.9 (−4.0D to −0.6D) at last examination (p = 0.12). Mean preoperative refractive astigmatism magnitude was 1.0 ± 0.6D (0.3D to 2.3D) changing to 1.1 ± 1.0D (0.0D to 3.0D) at last examination (p = 0.88). Mean preoperative IOP was 14.7 ± 3.2 mmHg (11–23 mmHg) without medications reaching 15.9 ± 3.3 mmHg (10–21 mmHg) at last follow up (p = 0.21). Postoperatively one patient required two medications for IOP control in his study and contralateral eyes. None of the patients had symptoms of IOL edge or TVO. There were no intraocular hemorrhages, inflammatory reactions, or pigment dispersion and the IOLs were well centered in all cases. Central foveal thickness was 280 ± 33 μm (193–310 μm).    Conclusions  Appropriately designed SPA-IOL may be implanted in the ciliary sulcus during phacoemulsification with PCT rather than switching to another backup IOL demanding wound enlargement.

Intermediate term follow-up after a single-piece-acrylic intraocular lens implantation in the ciliary sulcus- a cross-sectional study