European journal of ophthalmology · 2018
Comparing capsular bag performance of a hydrophilic and a hydrophobic intraocular lens: A randomised two-centre study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Koshy John, Hirnschall Nino, Vyas Ashok Kumar V, Narendran R, Crnej Alja, Gangwani Vinod, Nishi Yutaro, Maurino Vincenzo, Findl Oliver
Аннотация
PURPOSE:: To evaluate the capsular bag performance and posterior capsule opacification development of two intraocular lenses differing in material and design.
METHODS:: This study included patients who were scheduled for cataract surgery and compared a hydrophilic intraocular lens (Super flex® intraocular lens; Rayner Surgical, Worthing, UK) with a hydrophobic intraocular lens (AcrySof® SA60AT; Alcon, Fort Worth, TX, USA). Follow-ups were performed 1 month and 2 years after cataract surgery, including a slit lamp examination and retroillumination images.
RESULTS:: In total, 80 eyes of 80 patients were recruited. At the 1-month follow-up, 6 of 39 cases had a gap between the posterior lens capsule and intraocular lens (1 case in the hydrophilic intraocular lens group and 5 cases in the hydrophobic intraocular lens group; p = 0.348). Objective and subjective posterior capsule opacification scoring showed no statistically significant difference between both groups (p = 0.123).
CONCLUSION:: Both intraocular lens showed a good capsular bag performance and a relatively low posterior capsule opacification development within the first 2 years after surgery.
METHODS:: This study included patients who were scheduled for cataract surgery and compared a hydrophilic intraocular lens (Super flex® intraocular lens; Rayner Surgical, Worthing, UK) with a hydrophobic intraocular lens (AcrySof® SA60AT; Alcon, Fort Worth, TX, USA). Follow-ups were performed 1 month and 2 years after cataract surgery, including a slit lamp examination and retroillumination images.
RESULTS:: In total, 80 eyes of 80 patients were recruited. At the 1-month follow-up, 6 of 39 cases had a gap between the posterior lens capsule and intraocular lens (1 case in the hydrophilic intraocular lens group and 5 cases in the hydrophobic intraocular lens group; p = 0.348). Objective and subjective posterior capsule opacification scoring showed no statistically significant difference between both groups (p = 0.123).
CONCLUSION:: Both intraocular lens showed a good capsular bag performance and a relatively low posterior capsule opacification development within the first 2 years after surgery.