scholarly journals A comparison between anterior chamber intraocular lenses with those of retro-pupillary iris claw lenses: Visual outcome and complications

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-15
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Chamber ◽  
Visual Outcome ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Iris Claw

scholarly journals Sutureless retropupillary iris claw intraocular lens implantation is a viable option in aphakic patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 350
Author(s):  
Neepa R. Gohil ◽  
Sandeep Kumar Yadav ◽  
Kaumudi Shinde
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Intraocular Lens ◽  
Visual Outcome ◽  
Good Alternative ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Intraocular Lens Implantation ◽  
Visual Rehabilitation ◽  
Lens Implantation ◽  
Iris Claw Lens ◽  
Iris Claw

Visual rehabilitation in aphakia has been a challenge with a wide variety of surgical options available for ophthalmologist. We report the visual outcome with retropupillary iris claw lens secondary to intra operative complications and secondary implantation in aphakia. An interventional study on 4 eyes of 4 patients was conducted. Preoperative visual acuity, slit lamp examination and fundus examination were carried out. Anterior vitrectomy and retropupillary fixation of iris claw lens were done. The primary outcome measure was best-corrected visual acuity and secondary postoperative complication was recorded at various intervals. All patients had visual acuity of ≥6/18 postoperatively. Sutureless retropupillary iris claw intraocular lens implantation is a good alternative of scleral-fixated intraocular lenses in aphakic patients.

scholarly journals Long Term Clinical and Visual Outcomes of Retrofixated Iris Claw Lenses Implantation in Complicated Cases

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sri Ganesh ◽  
Sheetal Brar ◽  
Kirti Relekar
Keyword(s):  
Visual Outcome ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Safety Index ◽  
Visual Outcomes ◽  
Lens Implantation ◽  
Distant Visual Acuity ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Iris Claw ◽  
Group 1

Aims: To evaluate the visual outcomes and complications after implantation of retrofixated iris claw (RFIC) lens in various challenging situations. Settings and Design: Retrospective, single centre, 8 year clinical audit. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of cases who underwent RFIC lens implantation alone (group 1) or in combination with vitreoretinal (VR), corneal or glaucoma procedures (group 2) was performed. The main outcomes evaluated were corrected distant visual acuity (CDVA) and postoperative complications. The mean follow up was 13.09±6.8 (range 6-24) months. Results: The study involved 100 eyes of 83 patients with mean age of 51.1±25.4 years. Group 1 included 59 eyes and group 2 had 41 eyes. In group 1, the mean CDVA improved from 0.86±0.81 to 0.38±0.51 LogMAR (p<0.001) with 72.8% eyes having gain in lines (≥ 2 lines) of CDVA with safety index of 1.73. The mean CDVA in group 2 improved from 0.71±0.65 to 0.38±0.34 LogMAR (p=0.003) with 65.8% eyes having gain in lines (≥ 2 lines) of CDVA with a safety index of 1.54. Group 2 showed a higher complication rate of 36.59% compared to group 1 (20.34%). Significant complications noted were secondary glaucoma (8%), disenclavation of haptic (4%), subluxation of RFIC lens (1%). Conclusion: The visual outcome with RFIC lenses when combined with other intraocular procedures is mainly affected by the complexity of co-existing pathologies .The complications are more related to the combined procedures performed rather than RFIC lens implantation alone. This may still be acceptable when complication profile of other intraocular lenses is evaluated in similar challenging situations.

scholarly journals Iris-Claw Intraocular Lens: Anterior Chamber or Retropupillary Implantation? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (8) ◽  
pp. 785
Author(s):  
I-Chia Liang ◽  
Yun-Hsiang Chang ◽  
Adrián Hernández Hernández Martínez ◽  
Chi-Feng Hung
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Chamber ◽  
Intraocular Lens ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Cell Counts ◽  
Iop Elevation ◽  
Iris Claw

Background and Objectives: Iris-claw intraocular lens (ICIOL) could be implanted in the anterior chamber (AC) or retropupillary (RP) in eyes lacking capsular and/or zonular support. Several studies have focused on comparing the efficacy and complications of these two techniques and we designed this research to review the published literatures. Materials and Methods: Peer-reviewed studies were collected through network databases (PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov) and analyzed. The primary outcome was the standardized mean differences (SMDs) of pre- and post-operative corrected distant visual acuity (CDVA). The secondary outcome was the SMDs of pre- and post-operative intraocular pressure (IOP), endothelial cell counts (ECC), and the odds ratios (ORs) of post-operative IOP elevation and cystoid macular edema (CME). Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software was utilized to conduct statistical analysis. Results: Six studies (one randomized controlled trial and five retrospective case series) were relevant and included a total of 516 eyes (255 and 261 eyes in the AC ICIOL and RP ICIOL groups, respectively). The quantitative analysis showed no significant differences in CDVA (SMD: 0.164, 95% confidence interval (CI): −0.171 to 0.500), ECC (SMD: −0.011, 95% CI: −0.195 to 0.173), and IOP elevation events (OR: 0.797, 95% CI: 0.459 to 1.383). Lesser IOP reduction (SMD: 0.257, 95%CI: 0.023 to 0.490) and a relative increase in the incidence of CME (OR:2.315, 95% CI: 0.950 to 5.637) were observed in the AC ICIOL group compared with RP ICIOL group. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis indicated that AC and RP ICIOL seem to have equivalent visual outcomes. RP ICIOL may perform slightly better with more IOP reduction and lesser CME. More randomized controlled trials, which have higher patient participation and more outcomes are needed to confirm our conclusions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document