Visual and refractive outcomes after cataract surgery and intraocular lens implantation using two different optical biometers for lens power calculation
First Author: A.Parafita Fernandez SPAIN
Co Author(s): M. Moraña-Borrageiros J. García-Borregón J. Martín J. Soares da Costa F. Alba V. Eloy
To study the real-life visual performance of a monofocal hydrophobic preloaded intraocular lens (IOL) when using two different optic biometers for IOL power calculation.
Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Pontevedra, Pontevedra, Spain and Clínica Oftalomológica Dr Parafita, Ribeira, Spain.
Two comparable series of 70 and 85 consecutive eyes that had undergone cataract surgery performed by the same surgeon, followed by EyeCeeOne Preloaded IOL (Bausch&Lomb,Rochester,USA) implantation, in two different centers during 2018 are retrospectively analyzed. Two different optic biometers (Aladdin,Topcon,Japan and IOLMaster500,Carl Zeiss Meditec,Germany), were used to calculate IOL power with the SRK/T formula. A-Constant was 119.7 for the Aladdin group and 119.2 for the IOLMaster500 group. Exclusion criteria included: corneal astigmatism greater than 1.5D, intraoperative complications, capsular tension ring implantation and cases with postoperative complications unrelated to IOL placement. Statistical comparisons were made using the unpaired Student t-Test.
Uncorrected distance visual acuity in decimal notation was 0,83±0,18 in Aladdin group and 0,80±0,19 in the IOLMaster group (p=0,358), the obtained mean spherical equivalent(SE) was -0,23±0,36 and -0,19±0,44 (p=0,562), and the mean difference between the predicted and obtained SE was -0,03±0,38 and 0,05±0,41 (p=0,191), respectively. A total of 82,8% of patients in the Aladdin group and 84,26% in the IOLMaster group were between ±0.5 D of SE.
In this first study with the EyeCeeOne Preloaded IOL, it proved to be a safe and effective IOL for pseudophakia, as no complications during injection or manipulation of the device were reported. Aladdin proved to be as predictable as IOLMaster, as satisfactory refractive outcomes can be achieved using both biometers. Care should be taken in order to optimize IOL constant when a new biometer is used, as a 0.5 difference in the constant, led to comparable results using two different devices. Further studies with extreme axial lengths are needed to further evaluate IOL performance in those situations.