A retrospective analysis of the first Indian experience on Artisan phakic intraocular lens.
ABSTRACT To evaluate the efficacy, safety, predictability and stability of implanting a polymethylmethacrylate phakic intraocular lens (PIOL) in high myopia.
A retrospective analysis of the data of patients who underwent Artisan phakic IOL implantation between 2002 and 2003 with a follow-up of at least 24 months.
An Artisan myopia lens was implanted in 60 eyes of 36 patients with preoperative myopia ranging from -5.0 to -24.0 D. Mean patient age was 22.6 years. Mean spherical equivalent of manifest refraction stabilized by the first postoperative week. At three months follow-up, 54 eyes (90%) had a postoperative refraction within +/- 1D emmetropia and 45 eyes (75%) had uncorrected visual acuity of 20/40 or better. Seven eyes (11.6%) had loss of one Snellen line and none had loss of two Snellen lines or more at three months. The mean endothelial cell loss was 3.8% at three months, 5.2% at six months, 5.25% at 12 months and 6.38% at two years, which was not significant. Postoperative complications included anterior chamber reaction in two eyes (3.3%), rise in intraocular pressure in six eyes (10%) and dislocation of PIOL in two eyes (3.3%).
Implantation of Artisan myopia lens to correct high myopia resulted in a stable and fairly predictable refractive outcome with few complications. Significant endothelial damage was not detected in two years of follow-up.
- SourceAvailable from: Seyed-Farzad Mohammadi[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Export Date: 17 March 2010, Source: Scopus, Correspondence Address: Mohammadi, S. F.; Eye Research Center, Farabi Eye Hospital, Qazvin Square, Tehran 1336616351, Iran; email: email@example.comIranian Journal of Ophthalmology. 01/2009; 21:21-28.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To evaluate a digital high-speed camera combined with digital morphometry software for dynamic measurements of phakic intraocular lens movements to observe kinetic influences, particularly in fast direction changes and at lateral end points.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) 01/2014; 8:1361-7.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Many factors are involved in choosing which approach is best for each patient. By Mayank a. nanavaty, DO, MRCS(ED), FRCOphth; and Sheraz M. Daya, MD, FACp, FACS, FRCS(ED), FRCOphth decision-Making: rLe versus phakic ioLs Refractive lens exchange (RLE) and phakic IOL implantation are alternative options to laser ablative refractive surgery. As intraocular procedures, both carry the very low but real risk of endophthalmitis. This risk has been reduced considerably by the incorporation of intraocular cefuroxime into current practice in Europe. 1 Although rare, potential complications including retinal detachment and cystoid macular edema must be considered and discussed with a patient in detail before surgery. UnderStanding RLE and Phakic iOLS RLE is safe and effective for the correction of moderate to severe myopia 2-7 and hyperopia. 8-13 Monofocal, toric, multifo-cal, and accommodating IOLs are available options that can be chosen based on patient needs and expectations. The safety of the procedure has been enhanced by the introduction of microincision cataract surgery (MICS) and of lenses that can be inserted through 1.8-mm incisions. Because RLE causes loss of accommodation, the procedure should be avoided if a patient's natural lens is still functional. 14-18 Several available multifocal IOLs provide patients with increased depth of focus including near, intermediate, and distance vision and make RLE an attractive option for both patient and surgeon. The primary advantages of phakic IOLs are rapid visual recovery, reversibility, a broader range of treatable ametropia, high predictability rates, stability, and preservation of accommodation. 19-2710/2012;