Pseudophakic accommodation? A study of the stability of capsular bag supported, one piece, rigid tripod, or soft flexible implants.

Abstract

A group of pseudophakic patients was investigated to determine whether their implants shift along an anteroposterior axis under different conditions of ciliary muscle stimulation. There was no statistically significant change in refraction after either pilocarpine or cyclopentolate administration. A change in anterior chamber depth between the position after pilocarpine and that after cyclopentolate was found. It appears that rigid posterior chamber implants do move backwards on ciliary muscle relaxation, but by a maximum 0.25 mm. This is not thought to represent a mechanical threat to ocular health. It is also not enough to account for the apparent accommodative ability of some pseudophakic patients. The possible causes for this phenomenon are discussed.