Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Nov 30:14:8975-8980.
doi: 10.2147/IJGM.S342039. eCollection 2021.

Nd:YAG Capsulotomy Rates with Two Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

Affiliations

Nd:YAG Capsulotomy Rates with Two Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

Huiran Bai et al. Int J Gen Med. .

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the incidence of Nd:YAG capsulotomy after implantation of two types of multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs).

Methods: This retrospective analysis included patients who had undergone cataract extraction and implanted diffractive MIOL (Acri. LISA tri 839M) or asymmetric refractive MIOL (SBL-3) from May 2016 to September 2018. They were followed up for at least 3 years. During the follow-up period, the relevant data of patients were kept by special person in the hospital. The rates of Nd:YAG capsulotomy and the Kaplan-Meier survival curve were used to analyze the two groups.

Results: The Asymmetric Refractive MIOL group was comprised of 98 patients (121 eyes), while the Diffractive MIOL group was comprised of 99 patients (120 eyes). There were no significant differences in age, sex, or IOL power between the two groups. The Nd:YAG rate of the asymmetric refractive MIOL group and the diffractive MIOL group was 3.3% and 7.5% respectively (P = 0.15) in the first year, 14.88% and 22.5% respectively (P = 0.129) in the second year, and 21.49% and 34.17% respectively (P = 0.028) in the third year. In the first 7 months of follow-up, the two groups showed the same performance in the Nd:YAG rate. After that, there was a difference between the two groups, and the difference gradually increased. Until the 27th month of follow-up, the difference was significant (P < 0.05). What is more, there were significant differences in survival (without Nd:YAG capsulotomy)/failure (with Nd:YAG capsulotomy) functions (P = 0.0035).

Conclusion: The incidence of Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy in patients with diffractive MIOLs was higher than that in patients with asymmetric refractive MIOLs.

Keywords: Nd:YAG capsulotomy rates; asymmetric refractive MIOL; diffractive MIOL; posterior capsular opacification.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors report no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The probability of having Nd:YAG capsulotomy up to the time point t.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The probability of not having Nd:YAG capsulotomy up to the time point t. Log rank test for equality of survivor functions (P < 0.05).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Alio JL, Plaza-Puche AB, Fernandez-Buenaga R, Pikkeland J, Maldonado M. Multifocal intraocular lenses: an overview. Surv Ophthalmol. 2017;62(5):611–634. doi:10.1016/j.survophthal.2017.03.005 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kossack N, Schindler C, Weinhold I, et al. German claims data analysis to assess impact of different intraocular lenses on posterior capsule opacification and related healthcare costs. Z Gesundh Wiss. 2018;26(1):81–90. doi:10.1007/s10389-017-0851-y - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wesolosky JD, Tennantand M, Rudnisky CJ. Rate of retinal tear and detachment after neodymium: YAG capsulotomy. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017;43(7):923–928. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.03.046 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Iliescu IM, Constantin MA, Cozma C, Moraruand OM, Moraru CM. Posterior capsule opacification and Nd-YAG rates evaluation in a large series of pseudophakic cases. Rom J Ophthalmol. 2017;61(4):267–274. doi:10.22336/rjo.2017.48 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Findl O, Buehl W, Bauerand P, Sycha T. Interventions for preventing posterior capsule opacification. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;2:CD003738. - PMC - PubMed