No abstract

PurposeTo evaluate the technique, safety, and efficacy of the retropupillary implantation of iris-claw intraocular lenses in a long-term follow-up study.Patients and methodsThis retrospective study included 31 eyes of 31 patients who underwent an Artisan aphakic intraocular lens implantation between January 2006 and February 2011 at the University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany and at the Zentrum für Augenheilkunde PD Dr Laube, Düsseldorf, Germany. Preoperative data collected included demographics, etiology of aphakia, previous surgeries, preoperative eye pathology, intraocular pressure, clinical signs of endothelial cell loss, and best corrected visual acuity. Operative data and postoperative outcomes included the best corrected visual acuity, lens position, intraocular pressure, pigment dispersion, clinical signs of endothelial cell loss, development of macular edema, and other complications.ResultsThirty-one patients were included. The mean follow-up was 25.2 months (range: 4–48 months). The mean best corrected visual acuity postoperatively was 0.64 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) and varied from 0 logMAR to 3 logMAR. Some patients had a low visual acuity preoperatively because of preoperative eye pathologies. In 22 patients the visual acuity improved, in two patients the visual acuity remained unchanged, and seven patients showed a decreased visual acuity. Complications were peaked pupils (n=10) and retinal detachment in one case. Four patients showed an iris atrophy and high intraocular pressure was observed only in one patient. Subluxation of the intraocular lens, endothelial cell loss, and macular edema were not observed.ConclusionThe presented long-term results demonstrate that retropupillary iris-claw lens implantation is a safe and effective method for the correction of aphakia in patients without capsule support. This surgical procedure has the advantages of a posterior chamber implantation with a low intraoperative and postoperative risk profile.

No abstract

Pupil diameters under both light conditions were largest with the Neuroptics pupillometer and smallest with the Procyon. The most "examiner independent" Procyon pupillometer performed poorly. The underestimation of the pupil diameter might have severe consequences for refractive surgery patients. The Neuroptics pupillometer showed a high interobserver agreement and repeatability and therefore high safety.