scholarly journals Short-Term Efficacy and Safety of Cataract Surgery Combined with Iris-Fixated Phakic Intraocular Lens Explantation: A Multicentre Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (16) ◽  
pp. 3672
Author(s):  
Miki Kamikawatoko Omoto ◽  
Hidemasa Torii ◽  
Sachiko Masui ◽  
Masahiko Ayaki ◽  
Ikuko Toda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Intraoperative Complications ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Surgical Safety ◽  
Term Efficacy ◽  
Intraocular Pressure Elevation ◽  
Phakic Intraocular Lenses

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of cataract surgery for patients with iris-fixated phakic intraocular lenses (pIOLs). This study included 96 eyes of 91 patients. The changes in the logMAR uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), subjective spherical equivalent (SE), astigmatism, and endothelial cell density (ECD) were collected retrospectively. The intraoperative and postoperative complications also were investigated to assess the surgical safety. The preoperative UCVA and BCVA improved significantly at month 1 postoperatively, respectively (p < 0.001 for both comparisons). The efficacy and safety index at month 1 postoperatively were 1.02 ± 0.56 and 1.31 ± 0.64, respectively. The SE at month 1 postoperatively was significantly (p < 0.001) higher compared to preoperatively, whereas the subjective astigmatism did not differ significantly (p = 0.078). The ECD significantly decreased at month 1 (p < 0.001). The most common postoperative complication was intraocular pressure elevation exceeding 25 mmHg in 10.4% of eyes, which was controlled with medications in all cases until month 1 postoperatively. No intraoperative complications developed. Cataract surgeries for patients with iris-fixated pIOLs were performed safely with good visual outcomes.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of extended depth of focus intraocular lenses in cataract surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Liu ◽  
Yi Dong ◽  
Yan Wang
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Contrast Sensitivity ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Depth Of Focus ◽  
Extended Depth Of Focus ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Near Visual Acuity

Abstract Background : This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenes (IOLs) in cataract surgery. Methods: All comparative clinical trials that involved bilaterally implanting EDOF IOLs in patients with cataract were retrieved from the literature database. We used random effects models to pool weighted mean differences (WMD) and risk ratio (RR) for continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively. Results: Nine studies with a total of 1336 eyes were identified. The subgroup analysis was conducted according to the type of IOLs used in the control group. Compared with monofocal IOLs, EDOF IOLs produced better uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (WMD: -0.17, 95% CI: -0.26 to -0.08, P = 0.0001) and uncorrected near visual acuity (WMD: -0.17, 95% CI: -0.21 to -0.12, P < 0.00001). EDOF IOLs resulted in reduced contrast sensitivity, more frequent halos, however, higher spectacle independence (RR: 2.81, 95% CI: 1.06 to 7.46, P = 0.04) than monofocal IOLs. Compared with trifocal IOLs, EDOF IOLs produced worse near visual acuity (MD: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.13, P<0.0001). EDOF IOLs performed better than trifocal IOls in contrast sensitivity, and there were no significant difference in halos and spectacle independence. Serious postoperative complications were rare, with no adverse events were reported in most studies. Conclusions: Increasing the risk of contrast reduction and more frequent halos, EDOF IOLs provided better intermediate and near VAs than monofocal IOLs. At the expense of near vision, patients receiving EDOF IOLs have better contrast sensitivity than those receiving trifocal IOLs. Halo incidence and spectacle independence of EDOF IOLs were similar to those of trifocal IOLs.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of extended depth of focus intraocular lenses in cataract surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Liu ◽  
Yi Dong ◽  
Yan Wang
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Contrast Sensitivity ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Depth Of Focus ◽  
Extended Depth Of Focus ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Near Visual Acuity

Abstract Background This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenes (IOLs) in cataract surgery. Methods All comparative clinical trials that involved bilaterally implanting EDOF IOLs in patients with cataract were retrieved from the literature database. We used random effects models to pool weighted mean differences (WMD) and risk ratio (RR) for continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively. Results Nine studies with a total of 1336 eyes were identified. The subgroup analysis was conducted according to the type of IOLs used in the control group. Compared with monofocal IOLs, EDOF IOLs produced better uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (WMD: -0.17, 95% CI: -0.26 to -0.08, P = 0.0001) and uncorrected near visual acuity (WMD: -0.17, 95% CI: -0.21 to -0.12, P < 0.00001). EDOF IOLs resulted in reduced contrast sensitivity, more frequent halos, however, higher spectacle independence (RR: 2.81, 95% CI: 1.06 to 7.46, P = 0.04) than monofocal IOLs. Compared with trifocal IOLs, EDOF IOLs produced worse near visual acuity (MD: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.13, P<0.0001). EDOF IOLs performed better than trifocal IOls in contrast sensitivity, and there were no significant difference in halos and spectacle independence. Conclusions Increasing the risk of contrast reduction and more frequent halos, EDOF IOLs provided better intermediate and near VAs than monofocal IOLs. At the expense of near vision, patients receiving EDOF IOLs have better contrast sensitivity than those receiving trifocal IOLs. Halo incidence and spectacle independence of EDOF IOLs were similar to those of trifocal IOLs.

Intravitreal Bevacizumab (Avastin) as Primary Treatment for Myopic Choroidal Neovascularization

2007 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 620-626 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Mandal ◽  
P. Venkatesh ◽  
R. Sampangi ◽  
S. Garg
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Choroidal Neovascularization ◽  
Intravitreal Bevacizumab ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Myopic Choroidal Neovascularization ◽  
Term Efficacy ◽  
Corrected Visual Acuity ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Best Corrected Visual Acuity

Purpose To evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of intravitreal bevacizumab in myopic choroidal neovascularization (mCNV). Methods In this noncomparative, consecutive, interventional case series, 12 eyes of 11 patients with mCNV without any previous treatment were included. Patients received intravitreal bevacizumab (1.25 mg/0.05 mL) at baseline and at 4 weeks interval, if optical coherence tomography (OCT) showed presence of intraretinal edema, subretinal fluid, and/or pigment epithelial detachment. Patients were followed up for a minimum of 6 months and changes in best-corrected visual acuity, central macular thickness (CMT) on OCT, angiographic characteristics, and complications were assessed. Results The mean refractive error was −11.25 diopters. At 6 months the mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improved from 20/235 (median 20/235) to 20/71 (median 20/80) (p=0.01). The mean CMT was reduced from 403 μm (median 365 μm) to 229 μm (median 239 μm) (p=0.002). At final visit 9 eyes (75%) had an improvement of BCVA of three lines or more, and only 1 eye (8%) lost two lines. No significant ocular or untoward systemic side effects were observed. Conclusions In this small series short-term results suggest that intravitreal bevacizumab (1.25 mg/0.05 mL) is safe, effective, and well tolerated in patients with choroidal neovascularization due to high myopia. Further evaluation in large series with longer follow-up is needed to confirm long-term efficacy and safety in such cases.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of a Combination of Shenmai Injection plus Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Guo-wei Qin ◽  
Tong-tong Xu ◽  
Xiang-wei Lv ◽  
Shi-min Jiang ◽  
Ke-jia Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Combined Treatment ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Shenmai Injection ◽  
Term Efficacy

Objective. To perform a systematic evaluation of the efficacy and safety of combined treatment of Shenmai injection and chemotherapy for lung cancer. Methods. A literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) describing the treatment of lung cancer by Shenmai injection and chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone was performed using the PubMed, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Value In Paper (VIP), China BioMed, and Wanfang databases. The databases were searched for entries published before September 1, 2019. Results. Thirty-seven RCTs, comprising a total of 2808 cases, were included in the present meta-analysis. Of these, 1428 cases were treated by Shenmai injection plus chemotherapy, and 1380 cases were treated only by chemotherapy. The results of meta-analysis showed that the combined treatment (Shenmai injection plus chemotherapy) increased the short-term efficacy of treatment (relative risk [RR] = 1.183, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.043–1.343, P < 0.01 ) and improved patients’ quality of life (RR = 1.514, 95%CI = 1.211–1.891, P < 0.01 ) compared with chemotherapy alone. With regard to the adverse effects, the combined treatment markedly reduced the incidence of white blood cell (WBC) reduction (RR = 0.846, 95%CI = 0.760–0.941, P < 0.01 ), platelet reduction (RR = 0.462, 95% CI = 0.330–0.649, P < 0.01 ), and hemoglobin reduction (RR = 0.462, 95% CI = 0.330–0.649, P < 0.01 ) and alleviated drug-induced liver injury (RR = 0.677, 95%CI = 0.463–0.990, P < 0.05 ). However, it did not offer a significant protective effect (RR = 0.725, 95%CI = 0.358–1.468, P < 0.05 ). The effect of the combined treatment on the occurrence of vomiting was considerable (RR = 0.889, 95%CI = 0.794–0.996, P < 0.05 ), and the combined treatment markedly increased the immunity of patients with lung cancer. Conclusion. The combined treatment of Shenmai injection plus chemotherapy enhanced the short-term efficacy of chemotherapy, improved the patient quality of life, alleviated the adverse effects of chemotherapeutics, and increased the patient immunity. These results should be confirmed by large-scale, high-quality RCTs.

scholarly journals Comparison of Visual Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction Between two Diffractive Trifocal Intraocular Lenses

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
asli cetinkaya yaprak ◽  
Mustafa Unal
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
World Health ◽  
Uncorrected Distance Visual Acuity ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Prospective Comparative Study ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Clinical Trials Registry

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the clinical outcomes and visual quality of patients undergoing cataract surgery with the implantation of two different models of diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs).MethodsThis randomized prospective comparative study included 60 eyes of 15 patients who scheduled to undergo bilateral cataract surgery with the implantation of two models of diffractive trifocal IOLs (RayOne Trifocal and AcrySof IQ PanOptix IOL). Monocular and binocular corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity (CDVA, UDVA), intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA, UIVA) at 60 and 80 cm, near visual acuity (DCNVA, UNVA), and patient satisfaction were compared over a three-month follow-up.ResultsEach group comprised 30 eyes of 15 patients. No statistically significant differences were determined between the groups in terms of CDVA, UDVA, DCNVA and UNVA. The monocular and binocular UIVA values at 60 cm were better in the PanOptix IOL group (p=0.04 and p=0.01, respectively), and the DCIVA and UIVA values at 80 cm were better in the RayOne IOL group (p=0.01, p=0.047, p<0.001, and p=0.042, respectively). No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in relation to the frequency and severity of visual symptoms evaluated. Regarding discomfort, the RayOne IOL group had more bothersome halos and starbursts (p=0.026 and p=0.01, respectively).ConclusionBoth IOLs provided very good restoration of visual acuity. However, with the AcrySof IQ PanOptix IOL, the likelihood of patients experiencing bothersome halos and starbursts was less. The RayOne Trifocal IOL might be a better choice for patients who require further intermediate vision.The study was registered under the World Health Organization international clinical trials registry platform: NCT04655274, 30/11/2020, prospectively registered.

Cataract

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgia Cleary ◽  
David Spalton
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Congenital Cataract ◽  
Intraoperative Complications ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Posterior Capsular Opacification ◽  
Clinical Knowledge ◽  
Practical Skills ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Nd:Yag Laser Capsulotomy

The chapter begins by discussing lens anatomy and embryology, before covering the key areas of clinical knowledge, namely acquired cataract, clinical evaluation of acquired cataract, treatment for acquired cataract, intraoperative complications of cataract surgery, infectious postoperative complications of cataract surgery, non-infectious postoperative complications of cataract surgery, congenital cataract, management of congenital cataract, and lens dislocation. Practical skills are then covered, including biometry, local anaesthesia, operating microscope and phacodynamics, intraocular lenses, and Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy. The chapter concludes with three case-based discussions, on age-related cataract, postoperative endophthalmitis, and posterior capsular opacification.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document