Journal of AAPOS : the official publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus · 2006
Surgical findings with the tinted AcrySof intraocular lens in children.
Сравнительное 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.
Beauchamp Cynthia L, Stager David R, Weakley David R, Wang Xiaohong, Felius Joost
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The AcrySof foldable acrylic intraocular lens (IOL) has become an accepted and frequent means of treating pediatric aphakia. A new version of this lens with blue-light filtering properties purports to offer superior retinal protection. We describe our experience with this tinted lens and compare it to findings with the standard, nontinted IOL.
METHODS: A chart review identified 29 eyes of 21 children (tinted lens group; age 11 months to 13 years) who had the tinted IOL implanted. The standard lens group consisted of 38 eyes (31 patients; age 11 months to 15 years). Most eyes had an intact posterior capsule at the time of implantation.
RESULTS: The incidence of postoperative inflammation was fairly high in both groups (71% in the tinted lens group, 60% in the standard lens group). The tinted lens group showed a higher incidence of transient inflammation than the standard lens group (p=0.03) but the rates of nontransient sequelae (posterior synechiae, iris synechiae, membranes formation, capsule, or IOL opacification) were similar (66% versus 47%; p=0.11). Posterior capsule opacification occurred in 15 eyes in the tinted lens group and 16 eyes in the standard lens group (p=0.15) but was visually significant in only 10 and 11 eyes, respectively (p=0.77).
CONCLUSIONS: Transient inflammation is higher with implantation of tinted versus nontinted IOLs, but long-term inflammatory sequelae are roughly equal, as is the rate of posterior capsule opacification. The question as to whether the chromophore in the tinted lens caused the higher incidence of transient inflammation is unresolved.
METHODS: A chart review identified 29 eyes of 21 children (tinted lens group; age 11 months to 13 years) who had the tinted IOL implanted. The standard lens group consisted of 38 eyes (31 patients; age 11 months to 15 years). Most eyes had an intact posterior capsule at the time of implantation.
RESULTS: The incidence of postoperative inflammation was fairly high in both groups (71% in the tinted lens group, 60% in the standard lens group). The tinted lens group showed a higher incidence of transient inflammation than the standard lens group (p=0.03) but the rates of nontransient sequelae (posterior synechiae, iris synechiae, membranes formation, capsule, or IOL opacification) were similar (66% versus 47%; p=0.11). Posterior capsule opacification occurred in 15 eyes in the tinted lens group and 16 eyes in the standard lens group (p=0.15) but was visually significant in only 10 and 11 eyes, respectively (p=0.77).
CONCLUSIONS: Transient inflammation is higher with implantation of tinted versus nontinted IOLs, but long-term inflammatory sequelae are roughly equal, as is the rate of posterior capsule opacification. The question as to whether the chromophore in the tinted lens caused the higher incidence of transient inflammation is unresolved.