Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014 Sep;40(9):1473-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.12.018.

Influence of intraocular lens haptic design on refractive error.

Author information

1
From the Studio Oculistico d'Azeglio (Savini, Barboni), Bologna, G.B. Bietti Foundation-IRCCS (Ducoli), Rome, and Scientific Institute San Raffaele (Barboni, Borrelli), Milan, Italy; the School of Optometry and Ophthalmology and Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Key Laboratory of Vision Science, Ministry of Health P.R. China, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China (Savini); the Jules Stein Eye Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, and St. Mary's Eye Center (Hoffer), Santa Monica, California, USA. Electronic address: giacomo.savini@alice.it.
2
From the Studio Oculistico d'Azeglio (Savini, Barboni), Bologna, G.B. Bietti Foundation-IRCCS (Ducoli), Rome, and Scientific Institute San Raffaele (Barboni, Borrelli), Milan, Italy; the School of Optometry and Ophthalmology and Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Key Laboratory of Vision Science, Ministry of Health P.R. China, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China (Savini); the Jules Stein Eye Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, and St. Mary's Eye Center (Hoffer), Santa Monica, California, USA.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

To assess the influence of intraocular (IOL) haptic design on the refraction prediction error in patients having cataract surgery.

SETTING:

Private practice.

DESIGN:

Comparative case series.

METHODS:

Corneal power and axial length were measured with the same devices in eyes with a 3-piece Acrysof IOL and eyes with a 1-piece Acrysof IOL and were entered into the Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T formulas. The median absolute error and mean absolute error in refraction prediction (ie, difference between expected refraction and actual refraction) were assessed 1 month postoperatively.

RESULTS:

The study evaluated 110 eyes with the 3-piece IOL and 84 eyes with the 1-piece IOL. With all formulas, the median absolute error was lower with the 3-piece IOL. It ranged between 0.15 diopter (D) (Haigis and Holladay 1) and 0.19 D (SRK/T) with the 3-piece IOL and between 0.23 D (Haigis) and 0.30 D (SRK/T) with the 1-piece IOL. With all formulas, a higher percentage of eyes with the 3-piece IOL were within ±0.25 D and ±0.50 D of the target refraction.

CONCLUSIONS:

Three-piece IOLs may yield better refractive outcomes than 1-piece IOLs. A possible reason is that once the early forward IOL shift previously observed with the 3-piece design occurs because of the haptic-compression force decay typical of these IOLs, the rigid haptics of 3-piece IOLs still exert more pressure against the capsular bag than the haptics of 1-piece IOLs. Therefore, 3-piece IOLs may better resist subsequent capsule contraction and provide a more predictable effective lens position.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE:

Dr. Hoffer receives royalties for his book IOL Power, Slack, Inc., and formula royalties from all manufacturers using the Hoffer Q formula. No other author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

PMID:
25135539
DOI:
10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.12.018
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wolters Kluwer
Loading ...
Support Center