Hydrophobic acrylic versus heparin surface-modified polymethylmethacrylate intraocular lens: a biocompatibility study
- PMID: 12883913
- DOI: 10.1007/s00417-003-0711-z
Hydrophobic acrylic versus heparin surface-modified polymethylmethacrylate intraocular lens: a biocompatibility study
Abstract
Background: The implant of intraocular lenses (IOLs) following cataract surgery induces a foreign-body reaction to the IOL and a response on the part of the lens epithelial cells (LECs). The purpose of this study was to compare these aspects after the implantation of two different IOL materials.
Methods: Thirty-six cataract patients were randomised to receive two different foldable lens: an acrylic hydrophobic IOL (Acrysof MA30BA) and a heparin surface-modified (HSM) polymethylmethacrylate IOL (Pharmacia & Upjohn 809C) after phacoemulsification. Slit-lamp biomicroscopy with specular technique was used to assess the inflammatory cell adhesion on the anterior IOL surface, anterior capsule opacification (ACO) and membrane growth from the rhexis edge at 7, 30, 90, 180 and 360 days after surgery.
Results: The 809C group showed a higher percentage of patients with slight inflammatory cell adhesion on the anterior cell surface and a higher small cellular density during the whole follow-up period. The epithelioid cell response was greater in the 809C group than the Acrysof group but the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant. The ACO increased during the follow-up in both groups but was significantly higher in the 809C group.
Conclusion: Acrysof lenses are more biocompatible than HSM IOLs, showing a lower grade of inflammatory cell adhesion and ACO. The implantation of these lenses may be particularly indicated in patients with pathologies predisposing to blood-aqueous barrier damage.
Similar articles
-
Uveal and capsular biocompatibility of hydrophilic acrylic, hydrophobic acrylic, and silicone intraocular lenses.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002 Jan;28(1):50-61. doi: 10.1016/s0886-3350(01)01122-1. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002. PMID: 11777710 Clinical Trial.
-
Results of hydrophilic acrylic, hydrophobic acrylic, and silicone intraocular lenses in uveitic eyes with cataract: comparison to a control group.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002 Jul;28(7):1141-52. doi: 10.1016/s0886-3350(02)01425-6. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002. PMID: 12106722
-
Uveal and capsular biocompatibility of 2 foldable acrylic intraocular lenses in patients with uveitis or pseudoexfoliation syndrome: comparison to a control group.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002 Jul;28(7):1160-72. doi: 10.1016/s0886-3350(02)01360-3. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002. PMID: 12106724 Clinical Trial.
-
[Influence of material on biocompatibility of intraocular lenses].Polim Med. 2007;37(1):35-45. Polim Med. 2007. PMID: 17703722 Review. Polish.
-
Tissue reaction to hydrophilic intraocular lenses.Expert Rev Med Devices. 2005 Jan;2(1):57-60. doi: 10.1586/17434440.2.1.57. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2005. PMID: 16293029 Review.
Cited by
-
Regenerative therapies for central nervous system diseases: a biomaterials approach.Neuropsychopharmacology. 2014 Jan;39(1):169-88. doi: 10.1038/npp.2013.237. Epub 2013 Sep 4. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2014. PMID: 24002187 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Current State of the Art and Next Generation of Materials for a Customized IntraOcular Lens according to a Patient-Specific Eye Power.Polymers (Basel). 2023 Mar 22;15(6):1590. doi: 10.3390/polym15061590. Polymers (Basel). 2023. PMID: 36987370 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Inflammatory response in the anterior chamber after implantation of an angle-supported lens in phakic myopic eyes.J Ophthalmol. 2014;2014:923691. doi: 10.1155/2014/923691. Epub 2014 May 25. J Ophthalmol. 2014. PMID: 24971169 Free PMC article.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical