Yonsei medical journal · 2016
Comparison of Toric Foldable Iris-Fixated Phakic Intraocular Lens Implantation and Limbal Relaxing Incisions for Moderate-to-High Myopic Astigmatism.
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.
Lee Jeihoon, Lee Hun, Kang David Sung Yong, Choi Jin Young, Kim Eung Kweon, Kim Tae Im
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of toric foldable iris-fixated phakic intraocular lens (pIOL) implantation and non-toric foldable iris-fixated pIOL implantation with limbal relaxing incisions (LRIs) for correcting moderate-to-high astigmatism in myopic eyes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of 146 patients (195 eyes) with myopic astigmatism who underwent toric foldable iris-fixated pIOL implantation (toric group; 94 eyes) or non-toric foldable iris-fixated pIOL implantation with concurrent LRIs (LRI group; 101 eyes) were retrospectively reviewed. For subgroup analysis, the two groups were subdivided according to preoperative astigmatic severity [moderate, 2.00 to <3.00 diopters (D); high, 3.00-4.00 D]. Visual and astigmatic outcomes were compared 6 months postoperatively.
RESULTS: The uncorrected distance visual acuity was at least 20/25 in 100% and 98% of the toric and LRI group eyes, respectively. The toric group had lower mean residual cylindrical error (-0.67±0.39 D vs. -1.14±0.56 D; p<0.001) and greater mean cylindrical error change (2.17±0.56 D vs. 1.63±0.72 D; p<0.001) than the LRI group, regardless of the preoperative astigmatic severity. The mean correction index (1.10±0.16 vs. 0.72±0.24; p<0.001) and success index (0.24±0.14 vs. 0.42±0.21; p<0.001) also differed significantly between the groups.
CONCLUSION: Both surgical techniques considerably reduced astigmatism and had comparable visual outcomes. However, toric foldable iris-fixated pIOL implantation was more reliable for correcting moderate-to-high astigmatism in myopic eyes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of 146 patients (195 eyes) with myopic astigmatism who underwent toric foldable iris-fixated pIOL implantation (toric group; 94 eyes) or non-toric foldable iris-fixated pIOL implantation with concurrent LRIs (LRI group; 101 eyes) were retrospectively reviewed. For subgroup analysis, the two groups were subdivided according to preoperative astigmatic severity [moderate, 2.00 to <3.00 diopters (D); high, 3.00-4.00 D]. Visual and astigmatic outcomes were compared 6 months postoperatively.
RESULTS: The uncorrected distance visual acuity was at least 20/25 in 100% and 98% of the toric and LRI group eyes, respectively. The toric group had lower mean residual cylindrical error (-0.67±0.39 D vs. -1.14±0.56 D; p<0.001) and greater mean cylindrical error change (2.17±0.56 D vs. 1.63±0.72 D; p<0.001) than the LRI group, regardless of the preoperative astigmatic severity. The mean correction index (1.10±0.16 vs. 0.72±0.24; p<0.001) and success index (0.24±0.14 vs. 0.42±0.21; p<0.001) also differed significantly between the groups.
CONCLUSION: Both surgical techniques considerably reduced astigmatism and had comparable visual outcomes. However, toric foldable iris-fixated pIOL implantation was more reliable for correcting moderate-to-high astigmatism in myopic eyes.