Justine Bontemps, Olivier Loria, Lucas Sejournet, Benoit Allignet, Sandra Elbany, Frédéric Matonti, Carole Burillon, Philippe Denis, Laurent Kodjikian, Thibaud Mathis
{"title":"二次无缝线后房晶状体植入术的屈光疗效：无缝线巩膜固定晶状体 Carlevale® 与瞳孔后虹膜爪晶状体 Artisan®。","authors":"Justine Bontemps, Olivier Loria, Lucas Sejournet, Benoit Allignet, Sandra Elbany, Frédéric Matonti, Carole Burillon, Philippe Denis, Laurent Kodjikian, Thibaud Mathis","doi":"10.1007/s00417-024-06683-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare refractive outcomes of the foldable intraocular lens sutureless scleral fixated sutureless (Carlevale® FIL-SSF) with the iris-claw lens (Artisan®).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent a FIL-SSF implantation or an iris-claw implantation between January 2020 and November 2022 in the ophthalmology departments of Hospices Civils de Lyon (France).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 271 eyes from 265 patients were included: 96 eyes in the FIL-SSF group and 175 eyes in the iris-claw group. At 6 months, the mean (SD) surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) was significantly lower in the FIL-SSF group with 0.3 (1.8) diopters against 0.8 (2.1) diopters in the iris-claw group (p = 0.01). The mean (SD) refractive error was also lower for the FIL-SSF group with 0.1 (1.2) diopters versus 0.5 (1.6) diopters in the iris-claw group (p < 0.001). The mean best corrected visual acuity at 6 months was not significantly different between FIL-SSF and iris-claw lens with 0.47 (0.58) logMAR and 0.39 (0.55) logMAR, respectively (p = 0.12). However, the mean (SD) operative time was longer for FIL-SSF implantation in comparison to iris-claw implantation (59.8 (21.1) minutes versus 41.9 (24.4) minutes, respectively (p < 0.001)). The rate of postoperative complications was similar between the two techniques.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study shows that FIL-SSF achieves better refractive results than iris-claw lens, with a similar rate of postoperative complications. As a relatively new implantation technique, there is a learning curve required to reduce operating time.</p><p><strong>Key messages: </strong>What is known? Multiple surgical options for correcting aphakia in the absence of capsular support can be used. Currently, foldable intraocular lens sutureless scleral fixated sutureless (FIL-SSF, Carlevale®) and iris-claw (Artisan®) implants are the two preferred options, but there is no consensus on the best technique to adopt. What is new? We showed that FIL-SSF has a significantly lower surgically induced astigmatism compared to the iris-claw implant. Similar rate of postoperative complications was found between these two techniques. Future studies with a longer follow-up period are needed to ascertain its tolerance.</p>","PeriodicalId":12795,"journal":{"name":"Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Refractive outcomes for secondary sutureless posterior chamber lens implantation: sutureless scleral fixating lens Carlevale® versus retropupillary iris-claw lens Artisan®.\",\"authors\":\"Justine Bontemps, Olivier Loria, Lucas Sejournet, Benoit Allignet, Sandra Elbany, Frédéric Matonti, Carole Burillon, Philippe Denis, Laurent Kodjikian, Thibaud Mathis\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00417-024-06683-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare refractive outcomes of the foldable intraocular lens sutureless scleral fixated sutureless (Carlevale® FIL-SSF) with the iris-claw lens (Artisan®).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent a FIL-SSF implantation or an iris-claw implantation between January 2020 and November 2022 in the ophthalmology departments of Hospices Civils de Lyon (France).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 271 eyes from 265 patients were included: 96 eyes in the FIL-SSF group and 175 eyes in the iris-claw group. At 6 months, the mean (SD) surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) was significantly lower in the FIL-SSF group with 0.3 (1.8) diopters against 0.8 (2.1) diopters in the iris-claw group (p = 0.01). The mean (SD) refractive error was also lower for the FIL-SSF group with 0.1 (1.2) diopters versus 0.5 (1.6) diopters in the iris-claw group (p < 0.001). The mean best corrected visual acuity at 6 months was not significantly different between FIL-SSF and iris-claw lens with 0.47 (0.58) logMAR and 0.39 (0.55) logMAR, respectively (p = 0.12). However, the mean (SD) operative time was longer for FIL-SSF implantation in comparison to iris-claw implantation (59.8 (21.1) minutes versus 41.9 (24.4) minutes, respectively (p < 0.001)). The rate of postoperative complications was similar between the two techniques.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study shows that FIL-SSF achieves better refractive results than iris-claw lens, with a similar rate of postoperative complications. As a relatively new implantation technique, there is a learning curve required to reduce operating time.</p><p><strong>Key messages: </strong>What is known? Multiple surgical options for correcting aphakia in the absence of capsular support can be used. Currently, foldable intraocular lens sutureless scleral fixated sutureless (FIL-SSF, Carlevale®) and iris-claw (Artisan®) implants are the two preferred options, but there is no consensus on the best technique to adopt. What is new? We showed that FIL-SSF has a significantly lower surgically induced astigmatism compared to the iris-claw implant. Similar rate of postoperative complications was found between these two techniques. Future studies with a longer follow-up period are needed to ascertain its tolerance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12795,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-024-06683-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-024-06683-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Refractive outcomes for secondary sutureless posterior chamber lens implantation: sutureless scleral fixating lens Carlevale® versus retropupillary iris-claw lens Artisan®.
Purpose: To compare refractive outcomes of the foldable intraocular lens sutureless scleral fixated sutureless (Carlevale® FIL-SSF) with the iris-claw lens (Artisan®).
Methods: This retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent a FIL-SSF implantation or an iris-claw implantation between January 2020 and November 2022 in the ophthalmology departments of Hospices Civils de Lyon (France).
Results: A total of 271 eyes from 265 patients were included: 96 eyes in the FIL-SSF group and 175 eyes in the iris-claw group. At 6 months, the mean (SD) surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) was significantly lower in the FIL-SSF group with 0.3 (1.8) diopters against 0.8 (2.1) diopters in the iris-claw group (p = 0.01). The mean (SD) refractive error was also lower for the FIL-SSF group with 0.1 (1.2) diopters versus 0.5 (1.6) diopters in the iris-claw group (p < 0.001). The mean best corrected visual acuity at 6 months was not significantly different between FIL-SSF and iris-claw lens with 0.47 (0.58) logMAR and 0.39 (0.55) logMAR, respectively (p = 0.12). However, the mean (SD) operative time was longer for FIL-SSF implantation in comparison to iris-claw implantation (59.8 (21.1) minutes versus 41.9 (24.4) minutes, respectively (p < 0.001)). The rate of postoperative complications was similar between the two techniques.
Conclusion: This study shows that FIL-SSF achieves better refractive results than iris-claw lens, with a similar rate of postoperative complications. As a relatively new implantation technique, there is a learning curve required to reduce operating time.
Key messages: What is known? Multiple surgical options for correcting aphakia in the absence of capsular support can be used. Currently, foldable intraocular lens sutureless scleral fixated sutureless (FIL-SSF, Carlevale®) and iris-claw (Artisan®) implants are the two preferred options, but there is no consensus on the best technique to adopt. What is new? We showed that FIL-SSF has a significantly lower surgically induced astigmatism compared to the iris-claw implant. Similar rate of postoperative complications was found between these two techniques. Future studies with a longer follow-up period are needed to ascertain its tolerance.
期刊介绍：
Graefe''s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology is a distinguished international journal that presents original clinical reports and clini-cally relevant experimental studies. Founded in 1854 by Albrecht von Graefe to serve as a source of useful clinical information and a stimulus for discussion, the journal has published articles by leading ophthalmologists and vision research scientists for more than a century. With peer review by an international Editorial Board and prompt English-language publication, Graefe''s Archive provides rapid dissemination of clinical and clinically related experimental information.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
