gms | German Medical Science

36. Kongress der Deutschsprachigen Gesellschaft für Intraokularlinsen-Implantation, Interventionelle und Refraktive Chirurgie (DGII)

Deutschsprachige Gesellschaft für Intraokularlinsen-Implantation, Interventionelle und Refraktive Chirurgie (DGII)

10.02. - 12.02.2022, Dortmund

Artikel

Artikel empfehlen

Video analysis of optic-haptic interaction during IOL implantation with three different IOLS

Meeting Abstract

Suche in Medline nach

  • Weijia Yan - Heidelberg
  • A.F. Borkenstein - Graz/A
  • R. Khoramnia - Heidelberg
  • T.M. Yildirim - Heidelberg
  • G.U. Auffarth - Heidelberg

Deutschsprachige Gesellschaft für Intraokularlinsen-Implantation, Interventionelle und Refraktive Chirurgie. 36. Kongress der Deutschsprachigen Gesellschaft für Intraokularlinsen-Implantation, interventionelle und refraktive Chirurgie. Dortmund, 10.-12.02.2022. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2022. Doc22dgii55

doi: 10.3205/22dgii55, urn:nbn:de:0183-22dgii551

Veröffentlicht: 10. Februar 2022

© 2022 Yan et al.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open-Access-Artikel und steht unter den Lizenzbedingungen der Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (Namensnennung). Lizenz-Angaben siehe http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Gliederung

Text

Purpose: To compare the optic-haptic interaction of different hydrophobic acrylic IOLs after using three preloaded injectors.

Methods: In this clinical study, we included a total of 231 eyes that underwent phacoemulsification and lens implantation procedures. We measured the characteristics of three preloaded injectors (multiSertTM [injector A], TECNIS Simplicity [injector B], and TECNIS iTec [injector C]). The analysis included IOL insertion, haptic–optic interaction, and the time of IOL delivery.

Results: The incidence of non-standard delivery performance with the leading haptic of injector A, B and C was 20%, 19% and 15%, and for problems with the trailing haptic, it was 36%, 6% and 4%. Haptic-optic adhesion occurred in 2% of cases for injector A, 44% for injector B, and 52% for injector C (P<.05). The fastest delivery into the capsular bag was for injector A (mean19.96±6.47 [SD] seconds). IOL power, we found, did not correlate with either the implantation time or haptic-optic adhesion.

Conclusions: We found different incidence of non-standard delivery performance for leading and trailing haptics in three injectors. And in some injectors, we have up to 52% haptic-optic adhesions.