PURPOSE: To compare the 2-year visual and refractive outcomes with the Eyecryl Phakic Toric IOL (EP TIOL) (Biotech Vision Care Pvt Ltd) and Visian Toric ICL (TICL) (STAAR Surgical) for correction of high myopic astigmatism. METHODS: This prospective, interventional, non-randomized comparison study included eligible patients who underwent toric phakic IOL surgery in one or both eyes with either the EP TIOL or TICL for myopic astigmatism. Two years postoperatively, both lenses were compared for their safety, efficacy, stability, and patient satisfaction. Vector analysis of astigmatism was performed using the Alpins method with the ASSORT software (ASSORT Party Ltd). RESULTS: A total of 50 eyes were included, of which 25 eyes received EP TIOL implantation and the remaining 25 received TICL implantation. Preoperative mean ± standard deviation of spherical equivalent (SE) and cylinder was −10.15 ± 4.04 and −2.08 ± 0.86 diopters (D) in the EP TIOL group and −10.21 ± 3.97 and −2.17 ± 0.95 D in the TICL group, respectively. At 2 years of follow-up, there was no significant difference between the mean uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity, spherical equivalent, and residual astigmatism between the two groups ( P > .05 for all parameters). Ninety-two percent of eyes in the EP TIOL group and 88% of eyes in the TICL group were within ±0.50 D of refractive astigmatism. Vector analysis of astigmatism showed a comparable Correction Index of 0.98 in the EP TIOL group and 0.94 in the TICL group, signifying a mild undercorrection of 2% and 6%, respectively. Two eyes in the TICL group underwent exchange for high vault and one eye required realignment due to significant postoperative rotation. CONCLUSIONS: At least for the first 2 years postoperatively, both toric phakic IOLs were safe and effective in managing high myopic astigmatism with comparable visual results and patient satisfaction. [ J Refract Surg . 2021;37(1):7–15.]

No abstract

Purpose. To compare the long-term safety, efficacy, predictability, and refractive stability following SMILE versus SMILE combined with accelerated cross-linking (SMILE XTRA), and to specifically study the regression patterns following the two procedures. Methods. This retrospective study included 54 eyes of SMILE and 54 eyes of SMILE XTRA treated for normal and borderline cases of myopia/myopic astigmatism, respectively, based on certain predefined topographic features and risk factors. Patients in both the groups were matched for age and refractive error. The mean postoperative follow-up for the SMILE group was 22.18 ± 10.41 months and the SMILE XTRA group was 21.81 ± 10.19 months. Results. At the end of follow-up, the mean sphere, cylinder, and SE reduced to −0.03, −0.09, and −0.08 D in the SMILE group and −0.06, −0.15, and −0.13 D in the SMILE XTRA group. 96% and 93% eyes remained within ±0.50 D in SMILE and SMILE XTRA groups, respectively, and 94% eyes maintained an UDVA of 20/20 or better in the SMILE as well as SMILE XTRA groups. Safety and efficacy indices for the SMILE group were 1.03 and 1.00. For the SMILE XTRA group, the safety and efficacy indices were 1.00 and 0.99. No eye in either group had postoperative ectasia or enhancement performed for significant residual refractive error. Conclusion. Both the SMILE and SMILE XTRA groups exhibited comparable visual outcomes, safety, and efficacy. Contrary to the belief, combination of prophylactic CXL with SMILE did not result in a hyperopic shift in the long term. No eye in either group encountered postoperative ectasia; however, further follow-up is suggested to establish the long-term effects on refractive and corneal stability following SMILE XTRA, as all the eyes treated in this group were borderline.

Purpose: Inopathy of prematurity (WINROP) Weight, insulin-derived growth factor 1, neonatal ROP algorithm is an online tool that has been validated as a predictor of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) in various countries. The current study was designed to evaluate the predictive ability of WINROP algorithm ( http://winrop.com ) using postnatal weight gain in detecting Type 1 ROP in Indian babies. Methods: Prospective single centre observational study of 153 consecutive preterm babies who were eligible for screening for ROP as per the standard guidelines. Sixteen babies were excluded from the study because of various reasons. Thirty-five babies had gestational age ≥32 weeks and were ineligible for WINROP algorithm. Online WINROP algorithm was used for 102 babies with gestation at birth less than 32 weeks. The alarms triggered by WINROP were documented. Results: Laser treatment was done in 30 babies who developed Type 1 ROP. Of these, WINROP alarm was signaled in 24 babies and 6 babies developed ROP without any WINROP alarm. These babies had associated comorbidities like respiratory distress syndrome, patent ductus arteriosus, bacterial sepsis, and ventilatory support. WINROP alarm was significantly associated with Type 1 ROP ( P < 0.001). The sensitivity of WINROP was 80% and specificity was 80.6% with a positive predictive value of 63.2% and negative predictive value of 90.6% in detecting Type 1 ROP. In the present study, no baby who was ineligible for WINROP developed Type 1 ROP. Conclusion: WINROP provides a novel online monitoring screening tool for identifying babies at risk of developing Type 1 ROP. In our cohort, none of the babies whose period of gestation was more than or equal to 32 weeks developed sight threatening Type 1 ROP. WINROP algorithm may also be useful in Indian population.