Purpose To evaluate the postoperative outcomes after implantation of a hydrophilic toric intraocular lens (tIOL) with a transitional conic toric surface in patients with astigmatism undergoing refractive lens exchange (RLE) or cataract surgery.
Methods In this monocentric study, clinical outcomes following implantation of the hydrophilic Precizon toric IOL model 565 (Ophtec) were analysed. For intraoperative axis alignment, the Verion Image Guided System was used. Intended versus achieved refraction, IOL position, visual acuity outcomes and power vector analyses were evaluated 3 months postoperatively.
Results Forty-three eyes of 28 patients (40 eyes cataract, 3 eyes RLE) received a Precizon toric IOL with a cylindrical power between 1.0 and 7.5 D. Target refraction was emmetropia except for four eyes that had a myopic target. The median postoperative IOL rotation at slit lamp was 3° with a range from 0° to 16°. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) increased from median 0.5 logMAR preoperatively to median 0.06 logMAR at 3 months postoperatively. Corrected distance visual acuity increased from 0.20 to −0.02 logMAR. Median preoperative subjective cylinder was 1.5 D and 3 months postoperatively 0.25 D.
Conclusion Preoperative diagnostics, IOL selection and correct intraoperative positioning of tIOLs are essential for good outcomes and postoperative spectacle independence following cataract or RLE surgery. Visual acuities and rotational stability of the Precizon toric IOL showed very good outcomes and the subjective postoperative astigmatism could be reduced significantly.
- toric intraocular lens
- transitional conic toric surface
- axis alignment
- power vector analysis
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Contributors Concept and design of the study: BCT, GUA and MPH. Data acquisition: BCT, RK and MPH. Data analysis/interpretation: BCT, RK, GUA and MPH. Drafting manuscript: BCT. Critical revision of manuscript: RK, GUA and MPH. Statistical analysis: BCT. Securing funding: GUA, MPH. Administrative, technical or material support: BCT, RK, GUA and MPH. Supervision: GUA and MPH. Final approval: BCT, RK, GUA and MPH.
Funding The study was supported by a research grant from Ophtec BV (Groningen, Netherlands) and by an Olympia Morata Stipend from the Medical Faculty, University of Heidelberg (to BCT).
Competing interests Financial disclosure related to this manuscript: Ophtec BV (Groningen, Netherlands): BCT: travel support, MPH: grant, travel and lecture fees.
Ethics approval Ethics committee of the medical faculty of the university of Heidelberg.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data sharing statement All members of the IVCRC have access to the data which where analysed in the study. All relevant results of the study have been published in the submitted article.