Comparative study of 2 types of implantable collamer lenses, 1 with and 1 without a central artificial hole.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 24503407.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.ajo.2014.01.032.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To compare the outcomes between implantable collamer lenses (ICLs), 1 with and 1 without a central artificial hole. Comparative study. We included 65 eyes of 65 patients with refractive error in our study. The mean manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) was -9.32 ± 4.02 diopters (range, 6.75 to -16.50 diopters). We divided patients into 2 groups based on the type of ICL used, 1 for those without a central artificial hole (Group I, 21 eyes) and 1 for those with a hole (Group II, 44 eyes). The postoperative changes in visual acuity, endothelial cell density, MRSE, higher order aberrations readings, and objective scatter index between the 2 kinds of ICLs were compared. The follow-up period was 3 months. There were no statistically significant differences in the postoperative changes in uncorrected distance visual acuity (P = 0.81), corrected distance visual acuity (P = 0.24), MRSE (P = 0.18), and endothelial cell density (P = 0.76) between the groups. Also, no difference in objective scatter index was found at 3 months (P = 0.32). None of the higher order aberrations readings showed any significant difference between the groups. There were no significant differences between the outcomes of these ICLs, either with or without a central artificial hole.
Medical subject headings
- Lens Implantation, Intraocular
- Myopia
- Phakic Intraocular Lenses
- Vision, Binocular
- Visual Acuity