gms | German Medical Science

102. Jahrestagung der DOG

Deutsche Ophthalmologische Gesellschaft e. V.

23. bis 26.09.2004, Berlin

Different multifocal intraocular lenses – effect on lens epithelial cells in vitro on human capsular bags

Meeting Abstract

Suche in Medline nach

  • corresponding author A. Liekfeld - Charité - University School of Medicine Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Clinic of Ophthalmology, Berlin
  • C. Hartmann - Charité - University School of Medicine Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Clinic of Ophthalmology, Berlin

Evidenzbasierte Medizin - Anspruch und Wirklichkeit. 102. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft. Berlin, 23.-26.09.2004. Düsseldorf, Köln: German Medical Science; 2004. Doc04dogDO.12.07

Die elektronische Version dieses Artikels ist vollständig und ist verfügbar unter: http://www.egms.de/de/meetings/dog2004/04dog107.shtml

Veröffentlicht: 22. September 2004

© 2004 Liekfeld et al.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open Access-Artikel und steht unter den Creative Commons Lizenzbedingungen (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/deed.de). Er darf vervielf&aauml;ltigt, verbreitet und &oauml;ffentlich zug&aauml;nglich gemacht werden, vorausgesetzt dass Autor und Quelle genannt werden.


Gliederung

Text

Objective

To investigate the effect of the posterior surface structure in different multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOL) on lens epithelial cells (LEC) in vitro on a human capsular bag model.

Methods

Sham cataract surgery, including IOL-into-the-bag-implantation, was performed on 18 donor eyes after removal of the cornea. The capsular bag including the IOL was dissected free, pinned on a culture dish, covered with medium and incubated. In each pair of donor eyes one eye had a diffractive PMMA IOL (811E, Pharmacia), the other eye had a refractive PMMA IOL (PA154N, Allergan) implanted, both IOLs with rounded edges. The time until the posterior capsule was totally covered by a confluent monolayer of LECs was documented.

Results

Posterior capsule was totally covered by a confluent monolayer of LEC on average at day 16.4 (±4.2) in the capsular bags with a diffractive MIOL, and at day 16.3 (±3.2) with a refractive MIOL. The difference is not statistically significant.

Conclusions

Although the two compared MIOL models have differently structured posterior surfaces, we could not observe a difference in LEC growing. Other factors, e.g. optic edge, seem more important in terms of PCO. A difference in secondary cataract might not be of any concern having the choice between those two MIOL models.