Comparison of clinical outcomes among 3 marking methods for toric intraocular lens implantation
- PMID: 26960558
- DOI: 10.1007/s10384-016-0432-6
Comparison of clinical outcomes among 3 marking methods for toric intraocular lens implantation
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the clinical outcomes of 3 marking methods for toric intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in cataract patients.
Methods: This study included 48 eyes of 48 cataract patients who underwent cataract surgery with toric IOL implantation. The rotational errors of 3 marking methods-the iris pattern marking method (iris pattern group), the pendulum marking method (pendulum group), and the 3-point marking method (3-point group)-were assessed.
Results: The respective rotational errors were 4.0° ± 3.1° (mean ± SD), 5.3° ± 4.1°, and 7.3° ± 6.0°. The iris pattern group had significantly (P = 0.048) smaller rotational errors than did the 3-point group; no significant difference was found between the iris pattern and pendulum groups. However, the differences in postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity and astigmatism did not reach significance among the 3 groups.
Conclusion: The refractive and visual results of toric IOL implantation using the 3-point marking method were comparable to the other methods evaluated in this study, although the accuracy of the axis alignment of the toric IOLs was significantly lower than that obtained with the iris pattern method.
Keywords: Axis marking; Refractive visual outcomes; Toric intraocular lens.
Similar articles
-
Accuracy of toric intraocular lens implantation in cataract and refractive surgery.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011 Aug;37(8):1394-402. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.02.024. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011. PMID: 21782085
-
Comparison of Toric Intraocular Lens Alignment Between Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Capsular Marking and Manual Corneal Marking.J Refract Surg. 2020 Aug 1;36(8):536-542. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20200602-01. J Refract Surg. 2020. PMID: 32785727
-
Comparing toric intraocular lens alignment: intraoperative image-guided system versus manual marking in cataract surgery: a randomized clinical trial.Int Ophthalmol. 2025 Jun 5;45(1):228. doi: 10.1007/s10792-025-03601-7. Int Ophthalmol. 2025. PMID: 40471381 Clinical Trial.
-
Comparative meta-analysis of toric intraocular lens alignment accuracy in cataract patients: Image-guided system versus manual marking.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2019 Sep;45(9):1340-1345. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2019.03.030. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2019. PMID: 31470944 Review.
-
Toric intraocular lenses: historical overview, patient selection, IOL calculation, surgical techniques, clinical outcomes, and complications.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2013 Apr;39(4):624-37. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.02.020. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2013. PMID: 23522584 Review.
Cited by
-
Optimizing outcomes with toric intraocular lenses.Indian J Ophthalmol. 2017 Dec;65(12):1301-1313. doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_810_17. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2017. PMID: 29208810 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Rotational slit-beam marking: an advanced manual corneal astigmatic marking method for toric intraocular lens implantation.Int Ophthalmol. 2020 Nov;40(11):3115-3125. doi: 10.1007/s10792-020-01498-y. Epub 2020 Jul 4. Int Ophthalmol. 2020. PMID: 32623630
-
Comparative evaluation of toric intraocular lens alignment and visual quality with image-guided surgery and conventional three-step manual marking.Clin Ophthalmol. 2018 Apr 24;12:747-753. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S164175. eCollection 2018. Clin Ophthalmol. 2018. PMID: 29731603 Free PMC article.
-
Consensus on the management of astigmatism in cataract surgery.Clin Ophthalmol. 2019 Feb 11;13:311-324. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S178277. eCollection 2019. Clin Ophthalmol. 2019. PMID: 30809088 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of the Orientation of the Corneal Steep Meridian Determined by Image-Guided System and Manual Method in the Same Eye.Clin Ophthalmol. 2020 Dec 1;14:4135-4144. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S277945. eCollection 2020. Clin Ophthalmol. 2020. PMID: 33293786 Free PMC article.
References
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources