Assessing the astigmatism-reducing effect of toric intraocular lenses in eyes with low astigmatism: randomized masked bilateral comparison

Hienert, Julius; Ruiß, Manuel; Hirnschall, Nino; Findl, Oliver

doi:10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001211

Cited by 7 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Professor Oliver Findl, from the Karl-Landsteiner Institute in Austria, had the highest h-index. His research directions include the efficacy and safety of various ophthalmological methods and IOLs, including an exploration of the characteristics of online IOL calculation tools [ 36 ] , and evaluation of the astigmatism-reducing effect of toric IOLs for low amounts of corneal astigmatism [ 37 ] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intraocular lens power calculation formulas: a scientometric analysis

Alshammari,

Tarazi,

Aloqaili

et al. 2023

Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The most accurate method of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in cataract surgery has not been determined, and further studies are needed to reach a consensus. The aim of this study was to assess publications related to IOL power calculation formulas, mapping their yearly trends, most productive authors, top publishing countries and institutions, and areas of specialization for IOL power formulas. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive analysis of research articles published on the topic of IOL power calculation formulas. Using PubMed, we employed appropriate search terms and filtered the results for the period of January 1, 1946, to June 28, 2023. Data were analyzed using CiteSpace, VOSviewer, and Microsoft Excel programs. The visual representations of the collected data through the use of figures was provided to demonstrate the aspects of IOL power calculation research. Results: We retrieved 5475 documents in the initial search. Analysis of these documents revealed an increase in the number of publications, from one publication in 1946 to 201 publications in 2023. The top three countries contributing to these publications were the United States, China, and Japan, collectively accounting for over 27% of the total articles. However, the two institutions with the highest contributions were located in the United Kingdom and Hungary, neither of which was among the top 10 countries in overall contributions. Overall 15326 authors contributed to publications pertaining to IOL power calculation formulas. Among these authors, the most prolific contributors included Achim Langenbucher from Saarland University (Germany), Giacomo Savini from G.B. Bietti Foundation I.R.C.C.S. (Italy), and Kenneth J Hoffer from the University of California (United States). Saarland University emerged as the most productive institution, contributing equally to two distinct departments: the Dr. Rolf M. Schwiete Center for Limbal Stem Cell Research and Congenital Aniridia, as well as the Department of Experimental Ophthalmology. The School of Physical Science at the Open University in the United Kingdom engaged in partnership with various institutions including Eye & Laser Clinic Castrop Rauxel in Germany and Johannes Kepler University Linz in Austria. Among the top 10 keywords found in the publications were “cataract”, “cataract surgery”, and “intraocular lens”. Conclusions: This study represents the first scientometric analysis of publications related to IOL power calculation formulas. The study offers valuable insights into the geographic distribution, contributing authors, and emphasis of research on the IOL power calculation formulas. Further cooperation is essential to pinpoint the most suitable formula and to address gaps in our current understanding.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The last cluster encompassed astigmatism and toric IOLs. Toric IOLs are considered the most productive way of correcting corneal astigmatism in a patient undergoing cataract surgery [ 60 ] ; thus, some studies have explored different aspects of toric IOLs in astigmatism correction [ 37 , 60 , 61 ] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intraocular lens power calculation formulas: a scientometric analysis

Alshammari,

Tarazi,

Aloqaili

et al. 2023

Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The 3 RCTs were published in 2023, 12 2021, 13 and 2020. 14 One prospective study published in 2023 16 and 6 retrospective studies were published between 2021 and 2023.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This report includes 1 SR, 11 3 RCTs, [12][13][14] and 7 nonrandomized studies (1 prospective and 6 retrospective). [15][16][17][18][19][20][21] Additional details regarding the characteristics of the included publications are provided in Appendix 2.…”

Section: Summary Of Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intraocular Lenses for Cataract Surgery

Hamel,

Bailey

2023

cjht

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What Is the Issue? A cataract is an opacity of the lens and is the leading cause of reversible visual impairment worldwide. There are no medical treatments for cataracts but surgical procedures that replace the lens with a synthetic lens (called an intraocular lens [IOL]) have shown to be effective for restoring vision. Premium lenses, including lenses to correct astigmatism (called toric lenses), are available but may not be covered by public or private health plans. Given that there is an increased cost associated with toric lenses, there is a need to evaluate their effectiveness compared to other available corrective options, including glasses. What Did We Do? To inform decisions about the appropriate use of astigmatism-correcting IOLs, CADTH sought to identify and summarize literature that evaluates the clinical effectiveness of toric lenses against other corrective options. An information specialist conducted a search of peer-reviewed and grey literature sources. One reviewer screened citations, and selected and critically appraised the included studies. What Did We Find? One systematic review (SR), 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 1 prospective nonrandomized study, and 6 retrospective nonrandomized studies were identified that evaluated the clinical effectiveness of toric versus nontoric IOLs implanted during cataract surgery, including 1 with a pediatric focus. Toric IOLs may be better than nontoric IOLs for postoperative astigmatism, but this may be dependent on the measurement of astigmatism evaluated (e.g., corneal astigmatism, residual refractive astigmatism, subjective refraction astigmatism, autorefraction astigmatism, spherical equivalent astigmatism, cylinder astigmatism, surgically induced astigmatism). Toric IOLs may be better than nontoric IOLs for postoperative uncorrected visual acuity (VA), but it is unclear if this results in a clinically meaningful difference to the patient. None of the studies reported on spectacle independence. Patient-centred outcomes were seldomly reported across the studies, and rarely used validated tools, making it difficult to conclude if there were patient-centred outcome differences between toric and nontoric IOLs. Harms were reported across the studies through intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, and adverse events. Postoperative complications were statistically higher in the toric group in the SR, but there were not statistically significant differences in harms reported in the primary studies. What Does it Mean? It is difficult to draw conclusions across the studies and outcomes due to the variation in how outcomes were reported or because few studies report on these outcomes. A proposed minimum set of core outcomes for cataract surgery was published in 2015. The studies included in this report did not align with this minimum set of outcomes. For example, as VA is not synonymous with improved visual functioning for patients, evaluating patient-reported visual functioning with a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) tool is part of the minimum set of core outcomes. Future research should incorporate core outcomes, including PROMs. Although toric IOLs statistically improved uncorrected VA, when compared to nontoric lenses, statistical significance does not imply a difference that is clinically meaningful to a patient.

show abstract

“…Studies have demonstrated that the refractive outcomes of these eyes are better than those receiving only spherical IOLs. Recent work by Heinert et al [ 45 ] illustrated that toric IOLs can effectively reduce low astigmatism (ranging from 0.75 to 1.5D) and significantly improve visual acuity as compared to non-toric IOLs. However, given the premium cost of toric IOLs, a cost-benefit analysis of low-powered toric IOL implantation remains to be further explored [ 46 ].…”

Section: Correction Of Low Astigmatismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Astigmatism Management in Modern Cataract Surgery

Park,

Aref

2024

Vision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Astigmatism management is a frequently encountered challenge in the world of modern cataract surgery. This review article investigates the importance of astigmatic correction and seeks to uncover the critical components of preoperative evaluation. With the rapid growth of new technologies and techniques, this article aims to also catalogue and clarify the multitude of astigmatism treatment options available for the cataract surgeon.

show abstract

Assessing the astigmatism-reducing effect of toric intraocular lenses in eyes with low astigmatism: randomized masked bilateral comparison

Cited by 7 publications

References 22 publications

Intraocular lens power calculation formulas: a scientometric analysis

Intraocular lens power calculation formulas: a scientometric analysis

Intraocular Lenses for Cataract Surgery

Astigmatism Management in Modern Cataract Surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About