April 2009
Volume 50, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2009
Intraocular Lens Power Selection in the Second Eye of Patients Undergoing Bilateral, Sequential Cataract Extraction
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • C. R. Henry
    Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
  • D. J. Covert
    Eye Institute,
    Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
  • S. B. Koenig
    Eye Institute,
    Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  C.R. Henry, None; D.J. Covert, None; S.B. Koenig, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  Heed Fellowship, Heed Ophthalmic Foundation, Cleveland, OH; Unrestricted Grant from Research to Prevent Blindness, New York, NY
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2009, Vol.50, 1150. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      C. R. Henry, D. J. Covert, S. B. Koenig; Intraocular Lens Power Selection in the Second Eye of Patients Undergoing Bilateral, Sequential Cataract Extraction. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2009;50(13):1150.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To determine if one-month postoperative error of predicted refraction of the first eye can be used to alter intraocular lens (IOL) power selection and improve refractive results for the second eye in patients undergoing bilateral, sequential phacoemulsification with intraocular lens implantation (phaco/IOL).

Methods: : Retrospective review of patients who underwent uncomplicated bilateral, sequential phacoemulsification with posterior chamber IOL between 1/1/2006 and 12/31/2007 by a single surgeon using a single IOL platform. The observed second eye one-month postoperative spherical equivalent refractive error was compared to calculations of the hypothetical one-month postoperative spherical equivalent refractive error if the first eye error had been fully or partially incorporated into the choice of IOL power for the second eye. The amount of partial adjustment was mathematically optimized.

Results: : 206 patients met inclusion criteria. The average of the absolute value of the unadjusted second eye error (|EUNADJ|) was +0.44 diopters (D) compared to the fully adjusted second eye error (|EFULL| ), +0.42 D. The optimal amount of adjustment of the second eye IOL power was determined to be 50%; the average of the absolute value of this partially adjusted second eye error (|EPARTIAL,50%|) was +0.36 D_this was statistically different from |EUNADJ| (p<0.0001) and |EFULL| (p=0.001). The statistically significant benefit was observed for patients with either myopic or hyperopic errors in the first eye. The percentage of patients achieving postoperative refractions within 0.5 D or 1.0 D of the predicted refraction were 66.5% and 90.3% for the uncorrected second eye, 67.0% and 90.8% for the hypothetical fully corrected second eye, and 74.3% and 93.7% for the hypothetical partially corrected (50%) second eye.

Conclusions: : Adjusting the IOL power in the second eye by 50% of the observed error of predicted refraction in the first eye reduced the error of predicted refraction in the second eye; this novel methodology has the potential to further improve the refractive outcomes in the second eye of cataract patients.

Keywords: intraocular lens • cataract • refraction 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×