4.5 Article

Optic replacement in a novel modular intraocular lens system

期刊

CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY
卷 44, 期 9, 页码 817-823

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/ceo.12786

关键词

cataract surgery; explantation; hydrophobic acrylic; intraocular lens; replacement

资金

  1. Research to Prevent Blindness, Inc, New York, NY, USA
  2. ClarVista Medical, Aliso Viejo, CA, USA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: The purpose of the study is to evaluate the stability and ease of replacement of a new modular intraocular lens (IOL) system consisting of a hydrophobic acrylic base unit and a hydrophobic acrylic optic in the rabbit model. Methods: Five New Zealand white rabbits were utilized. Bilateral phacoemulsification was performed; one eye received the test IOL (ClarVista Harmoni Modular IOL System) and the other, a commercially available hydrophobic acrylic control IOL (Alcon AcrySof SA60AT). Slit-lamp examinations were performed weekly during postoperative weeks 1 to 6. IOL replacement procedures were performed at weeks 2 and 6 using standard instruments. The rabbits were sacrificed at the end of the study (week 6), with all globes analyzed grossly using the Miyake-Apple technique and sectioned and processed for histopathologic examination. Results: The base component and the optic of the Harmoni IOL system remained stable and centred throughout the clinical follow up. Disengagement of the optic component from the base and replacement of the optic were safely and easily accomplished at 2 and 6 weeks postoperatively. Explantation of the control lens required posterior synechiolysis and capsular bag manipulation due to the position of the loops at the periphery of the bag, thus causing zonular stress. Conclusions: Replacement of the Harmoni optic was found to be safe and efficient compared with the control IOL, as manipulation of the capsular bag to remove haptic components is not necessary with the modular design. The base component of the modular system remained stable and centred throughout the study.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据