POSITION OF IN-THE-BAG POSTERIOR CHAMBER INTRAOCULAR LENSES RELATIVE TO THE LIMBUS: Applications to Scleral-Sutured Lenses
- PMID: 33239547
- DOI: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000003044
POSITION OF IN-THE-BAG POSTERIOR CHAMBER INTRAOCULAR LENSES RELATIVE TO THE LIMBUS: Applications to Scleral-Sutured Lenses
Abstract
Purpose: To characterize the true position of in-the-bag intraocular lenses (IOLs) relative to the limbus using ultrasound biomicroscopy and estimate scleral-sutured IOL positioning.
Methods: This prospective single-center study included 70 eyes of 41 patients with in-the-bag posterior chamber IOLs. Four vertical ultrasound biomicroscopy captures were performed in each eye in the superior, inferior, nasal, and temporal quadrants. Postoperative biometric data were collected. The primary outcome was the vertical distance of the in-the-bag IOL from the sclerocorneal limbus. Secondary outcomes included anterior shift and refractive change of a theoretical scleral-sutured IOL using sclerotomies at 2.5 mm and 3 mm posterior to the limbus.
Results: A total of 265 ultrasound biomicroscopy images were analyzed, including 64 superior, 69 inferior, 66 nasal, and 66 temporal. The true in-the-bag IOL position measured as distance posterior to the sclerocorneal limbus was 4.23 ± 0.56 mm superiorly, 4.22 ± 0.46 mm inferiorly, 3.95 ± 0.48 mm nasally, and 3.86 ± 0.52 mm temporally. The anterior shift of a theoretical scleral-sutured IOL was 0.60 mm for a 3-mm sclerotomy and 0.93 mm for a 2.5-mm sclerotomy, resulting in a theoretical myopic shift of 0.45 diopter (D) and 0.79 D, respectively, assuming a 15-D IOL. Larger biometric measurements correlated with a more posterior in-the-bag position.
Conclusion: True in-the-bag IOL position was found to be more posterior than estimates of scleral-sutured IOLs. Additional corrections in scleral-sutured IOL calculations may improve refractive outcomes.
References
-
- Eye Care Work Group. Eye Care II: Physician Performance Measurement Set. Chicago, IL: American Medical Association and National Committee for Quality Assurance; 2007:18. Available at: http://www.ama-assn.org/apps/listserv/x-check/qmeasur- e.cgi?submit1⁄4PCPI . Accessed September 4, 2013.
-
- Russo CA, Owens P, Steiner C, et al. Ambulatory Surgery in U.S. Hospitals, 2003. HCUP Fact Book 9. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2007:iv. Available at: http://archive.ahrq.gov/data/hcup/factbk9/factbk9.pdf . Accessed September 4, 2013.
-
- Murphy C, Tuft SJ, Minassian DC. Refractive error and visual outcome after cataract extraction. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002;28:62–66.
-
- Brogan K, Diaper CJ, Rotchford AP. Cataract surgery refractive outcomes: representative standards in a National Health Service setting. Br J Ophthalmol 2019;103:539–543.
-
- Aristodemou P, Knox Cartwright NE, Sparrow JM, et al. Formula choice: Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, or SRK/T and refractive outcomes in 8108 eyes after cataract surgery with biometry by partial coherence interferometry. J Cataract Refract Surg 2011;37:63–71.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials