AIM： To compare the outcomes of vision using two different intraocular lens（IOL） replacement techniques,iris-fixated foldable intraocular lens（IF-IOL） and scleralfixated foldable intraocular lens（SF-IOL） in pat...AIM： To compare the outcomes of vision using two different intraocular lens（IOL） replacement techniques,iris-fixated foldable intraocular lens（IF-IOL） and scleralfixated foldable intraocular lens（SF-IOL） in patients with insufficient capsular support.METHODS： Total 63 eyes（62 patients） with insufficient posterior capsule support underwent replacement of IF-IOL or SF-IOL between January 2008 and August 2011.Outcome measures included changes in visual acuity, slit lamp examination, refractive indices and corneal curvatures. RESULTS： The mean improvement of uncorrected visual acuity（UCVA） was greater in IF-IOL group compared to the SF-IOL group（0.43 D±0.19 D vs 0.35 D±0.18 D, P 〈0.05）. Moreover, 12（38.71%） eyes in IF-IOL group and 4（12.50%） in SF-IOL group had a higher postoperative UCVA than preoperative best corrected visual acuity（BCVA） while 9（29.03%） eyes in IF-IOLgroup and 18（56.25%） in SF-IOL group had a lower postoperative UCVA than preoperative BCVA. The myopic mean manifest sphere and mean cylinder magnitude were lower in the IF-IOL group than that in the SF-IOL group（-0.47 D±0.58 D vs 0.50 D±0.43 D, P 〈0.01; 0.84 D ±0.53 D vs 1.23 D ±0.70 D, P 〈0.05）. No difference of corneal astigmatism and surgically induced astigmatism was found between the two groups. In addition, fewer complications were observed in IF-IOL eyes. CONCLUSION： IF-IOL implantation can give a significant improvement in vision with fewer complications than SF-IOL in patients with insufficient capsular support.展开更多
基金Supported by Research Fund of Shandong Public Health Department(No.2009HZ038)
文摘AIM： To compare the outcomes of vision using two different intraocular lens（IOL） replacement techniques,iris-fixated foldable intraocular lens（IF-IOL） and scleralfixated foldable intraocular lens（SF-IOL） in patients with insufficient capsular support.METHODS： Total 63 eyes（62 patients） with insufficient posterior capsule support underwent replacement of IF-IOL or SF-IOL between January 2008 and August 2011.Outcome measures included changes in visual acuity, slit lamp examination, refractive indices and corneal curvatures. RESULTS： The mean improvement of uncorrected visual acuity（UCVA） was greater in IF-IOL group compared to the SF-IOL group（0.43 D±0.19 D vs 0.35 D±0.18 D, P 〈0.05）. Moreover, 12（38.71%） eyes in IF-IOL group and 4（12.50%） in SF-IOL group had a higher postoperative UCVA than preoperative best corrected visual acuity（BCVA） while 9（29.03%） eyes in IF-IOLgroup and 18（56.25%） in SF-IOL group had a lower postoperative UCVA than preoperative BCVA. The myopic mean manifest sphere and mean cylinder magnitude were lower in the IF-IOL group than that in the SF-IOL group（-0.47 D±0.58 D vs 0.50 D±0.43 D, P 〈0.01; 0.84 D ±0.53 D vs 1.23 D ±0.70 D, P 〈0.05）. No difference of corneal astigmatism and surgically induced astigmatism was found between the two groups. In addition, fewer complications were observed in IF-IOL eyes. CONCLUSION： IF-IOL implantation can give a significant improvement in vision with fewer complications than SF-IOL in patients with insufficient capsular support.
