We have located links that may give you full text access.
Efficacy of Toric Intraocular Lens Implantation in Patients Older Than 80 Years with Cataracts and Corneal Astigmatism.
Ophthalmology and Therapy 2023 March 2
INTRODUCTION: This study analyzed the visual outcome following cataract surgery with toric intraocular lenses (IOLs) in patients older than 80 years with corneal astigmatism.
METHODS: A total of 159 patients (159 eyes) older than 80 years with corneal astigmatism (≥ 0.75 D) were included. Fifty-three eyes received Acrysof IQ® toric IOLs (SN6AT2-5), while the others received non-toric IOLs: 51 eyes received Acrysof IQ® IOLs (SN60WF) and 55 eyes received A1-UV IOLs. The uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity, and refraction (spherical equivalent, refractive cylinder) were assessed at 3 months postoperatively. The prediction error of refractive outcome and percentages of eyes within ± 0.50 D and ± 1.00 D in the toric IOL group obtained using five toric IOL formulas (Barrett predicted posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA), Barrett measured PCA, Kane, EVO 2.0 and Næser-Savini) were compared.
RESULTS: At 3 months postoperatively, the average uncorrected distance visual acuity was better in the toric IOL group than the non-toric IOL group (p < 0.001). The mean residual refractive cylinder was lower in the toric IOL group than the non-toric IOL group (p < 0.001). The Næser-Savini formula achieved the lowest mean absolute error (0.39 D) and had the highest percentages of eyes within an absolute error of 0.50 D and 1.00 D (72% and 98%) compared to the other formulas.
CONCLUSION: The results demonstrate the efficacy of toric IOL implantation in patients older than 80 years with corneal astigmatism and provide strong evidence for cataract surgeons to encourage such patients to choose toric IOLs.
METHODS: A total of 159 patients (159 eyes) older than 80 years with corneal astigmatism (≥ 0.75 D) were included. Fifty-three eyes received Acrysof IQ® toric IOLs (SN6AT2-5), while the others received non-toric IOLs: 51 eyes received Acrysof IQ® IOLs (SN60WF) and 55 eyes received A1-UV IOLs. The uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity, and refraction (spherical equivalent, refractive cylinder) were assessed at 3 months postoperatively. The prediction error of refractive outcome and percentages of eyes within ± 0.50 D and ± 1.00 D in the toric IOL group obtained using five toric IOL formulas (Barrett predicted posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA), Barrett measured PCA, Kane, EVO 2.0 and Næser-Savini) were compared.
RESULTS: At 3 months postoperatively, the average uncorrected distance visual acuity was better in the toric IOL group than the non-toric IOL group (p < 0.001). The mean residual refractive cylinder was lower in the toric IOL group than the non-toric IOL group (p < 0.001). The Næser-Savini formula achieved the lowest mean absolute error (0.39 D) and had the highest percentages of eyes within an absolute error of 0.50 D and 1.00 D (72% and 98%) compared to the other formulas.
CONCLUSION: The results demonstrate the efficacy of toric IOL implantation in patients older than 80 years with corneal astigmatism and provide strong evidence for cataract surgeons to encourage such patients to choose toric IOLs.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app