We aimed to summarize the outcomes reported following the implantation of the V4c implantable collamer lens with a central port (ICL, STAAR Surgical Inc) for myopia correction. A literature search in PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus was carried out to identify publications reporting clinical outcomes of patients who were implanted with the V4c ICL model and had a follow-up period of at least 6 months. A total of 35 clinical studies published between 2012 and 2020 were included in the present review. A comprehensive analysis of the available data was performed, focusing on visual and refractive outcomes at different time-points post-surgery. In addition, adverse events and other parameters such as endothelial cell density, intraocular pressure and vault measurements-which were evaluated in some of the studies-were also compared. This review encompassed a total of 2904 eyes. The outcomes reported in this review lead us to conclude that ICL V4c implantation for myopia correction is a safe and efficient procedure, with stable visual and refractive outcomes and low adverse event rates. The patient's anterior segment should be thoroughly characterized, and the ICL parameters should be carefully selected so as to achieve good outcomes and avoid complications.

Purpose: To evaluate the agreement between different parameters obtained with 2 swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT)-based biometers and 1 Scheimpflug camera with partial coherence interferometry (PCI). Setting: Single center, Oftalvist, Alicante, Spain. Design: Prospective case series. Methods: Biometry was performed in 49 eyes using 3 optical biometers: ANTERION SS-OCT, IOLMaster 700 SS-OCT, and Pentacam AXL PCI. Keratometry (K), J0 and J45 vectors, anterior chamber depth (ACD), central corneal thickness (CCT), white-to-white (WTW), lens thickness (LT), and axial length (AL) were measured with each device. Bland-Altman analysis was applied. Results: This study comprises 49 eyes of 49 patients. There were no statistically significant differences for K1, K2, J0 and J45 between the 3 devices (P > .9). In contrast, there was a statistically significant difference in the ACD, CCT, WTW, LT, and AL between the biometers (P < .001). Specifically, there was a statistically significant difference between ACD, CCT, and WTW values for all-pairwise comparisons. IOLMaster showed the shortest ACD value and ANTERION showed the largest ACD. IOLMaster showed the highest CCT and Pentacam showed the lowest CCT. IOLMaster showed the largest WTW and Pentacam showed the shortest WTW. The LT measured with IOLMaster was thicker than that measured with ANTERION. There was a statistically significant difference in the AL between IOLMaster and Pentacam, with a shorter AL measured with IOLMaster (P < .001), but no differences were found between ANTERION and IOLMaster (P = .599) and between ANTERION and Pentacam (P = .054). Conclusions: Mean differences and the limits of agreement obtained in all-pairwise comparisons of the different parameters should be judged clinically to consider the interchangeability of these devices.

SS-OCT–based biometers provide repeatable and reproducible measurements in different ocular parameters. Optical biometers based on this technology are likely to become the gold standard for ocular biometry.