Authors
Pershin K.B.1, 2, Pashinova N.F.1, 2, Tsygankov A.Iu.1, Kosova I.V.1
1 «Eximer» eye center, Moscow
2 Academy of Postgraduate Education FGBU FNCC FMBA Russia, Moscow
Abstract
Rationale: In recent years, the technique of IOL hydroimplantation has become widespread, which can reduce the time and cost of phacoemulsification surgery and, in some cases, accelerate visual rehabilitation.
Objective: comparative analysis of faco results in viscoimplantation and hydroimplantation modes.
Methods: The prospective study included 145 patients (158 eyes), including 93 women and 52 men, after bilateral or monolateral implantation of different IOL models. The groups were divided into groups according to the type of implantation – visco- (n = 72, group V) or hydro- (n = 86, group H). The age range of patients in the total cohort was from 37 to 92 (71.9±11.8) years. The mean follow-up after surgery (November 2022 to February 2023) was 3.0±0.2 months. Axial eye length, anterior chamber depth, intraocular pressure (IOP), epithelial cell density (ECD), and mean absolute error were assessed in the pre- and postoperative period. The time of IOL implantation was estimated.
Results: The groups were comparable in terms of the main clinical and demographic indicators. Both groups showed a slight decrease in ECD values up to 3 months. No statistically significant values (p>0.05) were found when comparing the mean values of ECD, IOP, axial eye length, and anterior chamber depth between the groups. Somewhat lower IOP values were noted in group H in the early postoperative period, which is associated with the specific density of OVD. The mean absolute error in group V was 0.42±0.19 D vs. 0.34±0.21 D in group H (p>0.05). The mean IOL implantation time in group H was 103.1±29.0 seconds, which was significantly shorter than in group V (148.4±33.2 seconds, p<0.05). Intraoperative complications such as iris insertion into the injector (n = 5; 5.8%) and anterior chamber pulverization (n = 5; 5.8%) were noted in group H. These complications were not detected in group V.
Conclusion: IOL hydroimplantation is a safe technique with no significant disadvantages compared to IOL viscoimplantation in cataract surgery. The advantages of this technique include shorter operation time and no IOP elevation in the early postoperative period.
Keywords: cataract, IOL, hydroimplantation, viscoimplantation.
References
1. Dick HB, Gerste RD, Rivera RP, Schultz T. Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery without ophthalmic viscosurgical devices. J Refract Surg. 2013 Nov;29(11):784-7. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20130816-02.
2. Rosado-Adames N, Afshari NA. The changing fate of the corneal endothelium in cataract surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2012 Jan;23(1):3-6. doi: 10.1097/ICU.0b013e32834e4b5f.
3. Pasikova NV, Kuznetsov IV. Toxic anterior segment syndrome (TASS). Literaturereview. Point of View. East – West. 2021;1:86–90. (In Russ.) doi: 10.25276/2410-1257-2021-1- 86-90.
4. Van den Bruel A, Gailly J, Devriese S, Welton NJ, Shortt AJ, Vrijens F. The protective effect of ophthalmic viscoelastic devices on endothelial cell loss during cataract surgery: a meta-analysis using mixed treatment comparisons. Br J Ophthalmol. 2011 Jan;95(1):5-10. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2009.158360.
5. Kugu S, Erdogan G, Sahin Sevim M, Ozerturk Y. A clinical comparison of safety and efficacy in phacoemulsification with versus without ophthalmic viscoelastic device. Semin Ophthalmol. 2015 Mar;30(2):96-100. doi: 10.3109/08820538.2013.833261.
6. Sim BW, Amjadi S, Singh R, Bhardwaj G, Dubey R, Francis IC. Assessment of adequate removal of ophthalmic viscoelastic device with irrigation/aspiration by quantifying intraocular lens ‘Judders’. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2013 Jul;41(5):450-4. doi: 10.1111/ceo.12024.
7. Tak H. Hydroimplantation: foldable intraocular lens implantation without an ophthalmic viscosurgical device. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010 Mar;36(3):377-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.10.042.
8. Özcura F, Çevik S. Hydroimplantation versus viscoimplantation: comparison of intraocular lens implantation with and without ophthalmic viscoelastic device in phacoemulsification. Rom J Ophthalmol. 2018 Oct-Dec;62(4):282-287.
9. Unsal U, Baser G, Soyler M. Intraocular lens implantation without the use of ophthalmic viscosurgical device. Int Ophthalmol. 2017 Feb;37(1):25-30. doi: 10.1007/s10792-016-0211-x.
