4.3 Article

Efficacy of a capsular tension ring for phacoemulsification in eyes with zonular dialysis

Journal

JOURNAL OF CATARACT AND REFRACTIVE SURGERY
Volume 29, Issue 2, Pages 315-321

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0886-3350(02)01534-1

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose. To determine the safety and efficacy of capsular tension ring (CTR) insertion in eyes with zonular dialysis of less than 150 degrees having phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens (PC IOL) implantation. Setting: Dr. Agarwal's Eye Hospital, Chennai, India. Methods: This prospective study comprised 21 eyes of 19 patients with zonular dialysis of less than approximately 150 degrees determined preoperatively or intraoperatively. After insertion of a CTR, phacoemulsification with PC IOL implantation was performed. The mean follow-up was 242.33 days. Results: Capsule collapse did not occur in any eye with a CTR. Intraoperative extension of the dialysis occurred in 2 eyes (9.52%). The IOL was placed in the bag in all the eyes except 1 that had traumatic cataract and received a scleral-fixated IOL during a subsequent surgery. Postoperatively, there was minimal corneal edema in 2 eyes (9.52%) and mild iritis in 5 eyes (23.80%). Three eyes (14.28%) developed raised intraocular pressure that responded well to medical therapy. The symptoms resolved in the 3 patients with preoperative diplopia. Fifteen eyes (71.42%) had a final visual acuity of 6/12 or better. Six eyes had a final best corrected visual acuity of worse than 6/12 because of coexisting fundus pathology. A dilated pupil examination at 6 months showed a well-centered IOL in all eyes. Conclusions: Phacoemulsification with in-the-bag PC IOL and CTR implantation in eyes with zonular dialysis of up to approximately 150 degrees had a success rate of 90.47%. Visual recovery was not as good as in normal eyes because of the problems associated with zonular dialysis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available