Visual and optical performance and quality of life after implantation of posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens

Purpose To evaluate visual, optical, and quality of life (QoL) outcomes and intercorrelations after bilateral implantation of posterior chamber phakic intraocular lenses. Methods Twenty eyes with high to moderate myopia of 10 patients that underwent PRL implantation (Phakic Refractive Lens, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) were examined. Refraction, visual acuity, photopic and low mesopic contrast sensitivity (CS) with and without glare, ocular aberrations, as well as QoL outcomes (National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument-42, NEI RQL-42) were evaluated at 12 months postoperatively. Results Significant improvement in uncorrected (UDVA) and best-corrected distance (CDVA) visual acuities were found postoperatively (p < 0.01), with significant reduction in spherical equivalent (p < 0.01). Low mesopic CS without glare was significantly better than measurements with glare for 1.5, 3, and 6 cycles/degree (p < 0.01). No significant correlations between higher order root mean square (RMS) with CDVA (r = −0.26, p = 0.27) and CS (r ≤ 0.45, p ≥ 0.05) were found. Postoperative binocular photopic CS for 12 cycles/degree and 18 cycles/degree correlated significantly with several RQL-42 scales. Glare index correlated significantly with CS measures and scotopic pupil size (r = −0.551, p = 0.04), but not with higher order RMS (r = −0.02, p = 0.94). Postoperative higher order RMS, postoperative primary coma and postoperative spherical aberration was significant higher for 5-mm pupil diameter (p < 0.01) compared with controls. Conclusions Correction of moderate to high myopia by means of PRL implantation had a positive impact on CS and QoL. The aberrometric increase induced by the surgery does not seem to limit CS and QoL. However, perception of glare is still a relevant disturbance in some cases possibly related to the limitation of the optical zone of the PRL.

The posterior chamber phakic refractive lens (PRL): a review

Implantation of phakic intraocular lenses (pIOLs) is a reversible refractive procedure, preserving the patient’s accommodative function with minimal induction of higher order aberrations compared with corneal photoablative procedures. Despite this, as an intraocular procedure, it has potential risks such as cataracts, chronic uveitis, pupil ovalization, corneal endothelial cell loss, pigmentary dispersion syndrome, pupillary block glaucoma, astigmatism, or endophthalmitis. Currently, only two models of posterior chamber pIOLs are commercially available, the implantable collammer lens (STAAR Surgical Co.) and the phakic refractive lens (PRL; Zeiss Meditec). The number of published reports on the latter is very low, and some concerns still remain about its long-term safety. The present article reviews the published literature on the outcomes after PRL implantation in order to provide a general overview and evaluate its real potential as a surgical refractive option.

Intrasubject repeatability in keratoconus-eye measurements obtained with a new Scheimpflug photography–based system

Purpose: To evaluate in keratoconus eyes the intrasubject repeatability of anterior and posterior corneal curvature and of other anterior segment anatomic measurements obtained with a new topography system combining Scheimpflug-photography and Placido-disk technology. Setting: Vissum Corporation, Alicante, Spain. Design: Evaluation of technology. Methods: All keratoconus eyes had a comprehensive ophthalmologic examination including analysis with the Sirius system. Three consecutive measurements were obtained to assess the intrasubject repeatability of the following parameters: anterior and posterior corneal curvature and shape factor, white-to-white (WTW) corneal diameter, central and minimum corneal thickness, and anterior chamber depth (ACD). The within-subject standard deviation (Sw) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated. Results: This study comprised 61 eyes of 61 patients ranging in age from 14 to 64 years. For anterior and posterior corneal curvatures and power vector components, the Sw was 0.29 mm or less in all cases. The ICC was above 0.990 in all cases except the flattest curvature of the posterior corneal surface at 3.0 mm, which was 0.840 (moderate agreement), and the posterior power vector J0, which was 0.665 (poor agreement), 0.752, and 0.758 (moderate agreement) for 3.0 mm, 5.0 mm, and 7.0 mm, respectively. In shape factor measurements, the Sw was 0.12 or less in all cases and the ICC ranged between 0.989 and 0.999. Pachymetry, ACD, and WTW had ICC values very close to 1. Conclusion: The new topography system provided repeatable measurements of corneal shape and other anatomic parameters in eyes with keratoconus.

Fixed Mydriatic Pupil Associated with an Intraocular Pressure Rise as a Complication of the Implant of a Phakic Refractive Lens (PRL)

We describe a case report of a patient that was implanted with a posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens (Phakic Refractive Lens, PRL) for the correction of moderate myopia and who developed postoperatively a fixed mydriasis compatible with an Urrets-Zavalia Syndrome (UZS). Specifically, a sudden acute increase of IOP in the left eye was observed in the immediate postoperative period. After IOP stabilization, the refractive result was good, but a fixed and mydriatic pupil appeared. This condition led the patient to experience visual discomfort, halos, and glare associated with high levels of higher-order aberrations in spite of the good visual result. A tinted-contact lens was fitted in order to minimize those symptoms. The UZS should be considered as a possible complication after implantation of posterior chamber phakic intraocular lenses.

Error induced by the estimation of the corneal power and the effective lens position with a rotationally asymmetric refractive multifocal intraocular lens

AIM: To evaluate the prediction error in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation for a rotationally asymmetric refractive multifocal IOL and the impact on this error of the optimization of the keratometric estimation of the corneal power and the prediction of the effective lens position (ELP). METHODS: Retrospective study including a total of 25 eyes of 13 patients (age, 50 to 83y) with previous cataract surgery with implantation of the Lentis Mplus LS-312 IOL (Oculentis GmbH, Germany). In all cases, an adjusted IOL power (PIOLadj) was calculated based on Gaussian optics using a variable keratometric index value (nkadj) for the estimation of the corneal power (Pkadj) and on a new value for ELP (ELPadj) obtained by multiple regression analysis. This PIOLadj was compared with the IOL power implanted (PIOLReal) and the value proposed by three conventional formulas (Haigis, Hoffer Q and Holladay). RESULTS: PIOLReal was not significantly different than PIOLadj and Holladay IOL power (P>0.05). In the Bland and Altman analysis, PIOLadj showed lower mean difference (-0.07 D) and limits of agreement (of 1.47 and -1.61 D) when compared to PIOLReal than the IOL power value obtained with the Holladay formula. Furthermore, ELPadj was significantly lower than ELP calculated with other conventional formulas (P<0.01) and was found to be dependent on axial length, anterior chamber depth and Pkadj. CONCLUSION: Refractive outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of the multifocal IOL Lentis Mplus LS-312 can be optimized by minimizing the keratometric error and by estimating ELP using a mathematical expression dependent on anatomical factors.