Journal francais d'ophtalmologie · 2018
[Assessment of astigmatism associated with the iris-fixated ARTISAN aphakia implant: Anterior fixation versus posterior fixation, study of postoperative follow-up at one year].
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lajoie J, Glimois V, Petit T, Amelie R, Varenne F, Fournie P, Pagot Mathis V, Malecaze F, Wargny M, Gallini A, Soler V
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The goal of our retrospective, single-center study of a case series was to compare the total, corneal, and internal astigmatism, and the visual acuity at one year after combined or stand-alone surgery consisting of iris fixation of an iris-claw intraocular lens (ARTISAN aphakia) in aphakic patients, according to whether the lens was fixated to the anterior (n=21) or posterior (n=51) surface of the iris.
RESULTS: We did not find a significant difference between these two types of fixation for any of the studied variables. The surgically induced astigmatism was 1.67 D at 176° in group A versus 1.19 D at 11° in group P.
CONCLUSION: Although this surgery creates additional corneal astigmatism, it has not been proven that it differs depending on the type of fixation of the iris-claw. If we adhere to the notion that the posterior fixated iris-claw decreases the risk of endothelial decompensation in case the implant becomes disenclavated, then reverse iris fixation of the iris-claw makes sense.
RESULTS: We did not find a significant difference between these two types of fixation for any of the studied variables. The surgically induced astigmatism was 1.67 D at 176° in group A versus 1.19 D at 11° in group P.
CONCLUSION: Although this surgery creates additional corneal astigmatism, it has not been proven that it differs depending on the type of fixation of the iris-claw. If we adhere to the notion that the posterior fixated iris-claw decreases the risk of endothelial decompensation in case the implant becomes disenclavated, then reverse iris fixation of the iris-claw makes sense.