Suppression of surface light scattering in intraocular lenses manufactured using an improved production process

Ogata, Mitsuaki; Honbo, Masato; Mori, Yosai; Minami, Keiichiro

doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.09.019

Cited by 6 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Colin et al reported the formation of glistening in 86.5% of implanted AcrySof SN60WF IOLs, despite manufacturing changes (34). However, Miyata et al reported that the improved manufacturing process of AcrySof IOLs suppressed the development of surface light scattering up to 3 years postoperatively (35). It was proposed that other types of hydrophobic acrylic IOLs like enVista (manufactured by Bausch and Lomb) are glistening free clinically (36).…”

Section: Glisteningsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Matsushima et al reported that glistening and subsurface nanoglistenings caused decreased vision in 5 patients, leading to IOL explantation, which followed the improvement of visual acuity (12). However, the majority of the studies did not find a significant reduction of visual acuity caused by glistening or subsurface nanoglistening (1,16,34,35,(41)(42)(43). Xi with colleagues, reported that more severe glistening caused the reduction of contrast sensitivity at a high spatial frequency and visual field.…”

Section: Glisteningsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…MTF of IOLs with SSNGs were similar to control values (54) The IOL age had negative correlations with CDVA, contrast VA, and contrast VA with glare in patients with 6 to 25 μm diameter glistenings (39) No correlation between the amount of glistenings and CS, CDVA, or contrast sensitivity-CDVA was found (83) Straylight elevation demonstrated a proportional relationship with the glistening number. Only in 20% the induced light scattering reached levels that have the potential to hinder visual performance (20) Higher glistening grade had significantly lower mean CS values at high spatial frequencies (41,44) No difference was found in the CDVA and CS 3 years after cataract surgery (35) A proportional relationship between the number of glistenings and straylight was reported (38) Scattering light intensity of the surface and internal matrix did not correlate with VA, contrast VA, or glare VA ( 16)…”

Section: Light Microscopymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A narrative review of intraocular lens opacifications: update 2020

Grzybowski¹,

Markeviciute²,

Žemaitienė³

2020

Ann Transl Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The opacifications of intraocular lenses (IOLs) can significantly impact patients visual quality.Despite the identification of specific risk factors, manufacturing changes, opacifications are not eliminated.Likewise, more attention in recent studies was paid to possible new risk factors, however one of the most important purposes of the studies remains opacifications effect on visual performance, which could be disturbed in different aspects. The aim of this review is to discuss the main risk factors of IOLs opacification in particular IOL types, and its impact on vision quality. Different risk factors were discussed in the study, including the material of IOLs, the impact of the breakdown of blood-aqueous barrier (BAB), and certain surgeries that can be associated with opacification formation. Glistenings occur more often in a hydrophobic material, however, the changes in water content of the IOLs can significantly reduce the formation of glistenings. The studies showed a significant effect of intraocular injection of exogenous air or gas during Descemet-stripping endothelial keratoplasty, Descemet-stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty, Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty, and pars plana vitrectomy on calcification formation. It raises a concern, as the incidence of these surgeries is increasing. Visual acuity decreases significantly after the calcification in IOLs occurs, and it usually causes IOLs exchange. However, disability glare seems to be more affected in patients with IOLs, which were affected by glistenings than visual acuity. Disability glare is associated with increased levels of straylight, which was widely evaluated in recent studies and it was reported to be a susceptible measurement to detect the presence of IOLs pathology. For future researches, it should be noticed that disability glare and straylight are more appropriate in evaluating IOLs opacification effect on visual quality than visual acuity. While reviewing the main risk factors of IOLs opacifications particular attention must be paid on calcification occurrence in hydrophilic acrylic IOLs after surgeries with intraocular injection of exogenous air or gas.

show abstract

Section: Glisteningsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Glisteningsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Light Microscopymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A narrative review of intraocular lens opacifications: update 2020

Grzybowski¹,

Markeviciute²,

Žemaitienė³

2020

Ann Transl Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…32 In order to reduce the occurrence of glistenings in AcrySof IOLs, Alcon Laboratories Inc. altered the manufacturing process in the early 2010s, implementing tight environmental and process controls in the formulation, cast moulding and curing operations. 37,38 Subsequently, Miyata et al 37 found that surface light scattering due sub-surface nanoglistenings was significantly reduced and Thomes and Callaghan 38 found that the percentage of IOLs with glistenings, induced in the laboratory, with a density of >100/mm 2 was 99% in the 2003 AcrySof IOL models and only 4.8% in AcrySof IOLs manufactured in 2012.…”

Section: Degradation/opacification/discolourations Within the Iolmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical and material degradations of intraocular lenses: A review

Stanojcic

Hull

O’Brart

2019

European Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:To review the published scientific literature concerning clinical and material degradations of intraocular lenses after implantation in cataract surgery.Methods:A search was undertaken using the following databases: CENTRAL (including Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; The Cochrane Library: Issue 2 of 12 February 2019), Ovid MEDLINE (R) without Revisions (1996 to February week 2, 2019), Ovid MEDLINE (R) (1946 to February week 2, 2019), Ovid MEDLINE (R) Daily Update 19 February 2019, MEDLINE and MEDLINE non-indexed items, Embase (1980–2019, week 7), Embase (1974–2019, 19 February), Ovid MEDLINE (R) and Epub Ahead of Print, in-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily (1946 to 19 February 2019), Web of Science (all years), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials ( mRCT) ( www.controlled-trials.com ), ClinicalTrials.gov ( www.clinicaltrial.gov ) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform ( www.who.int/ictrp/search/en ). Only published articles in English were selected. Search terms/keywords included ‘IOL’ or ‘intraocular lens’, combined with ‘opacification’, degradation, glistenings, nanoglistenings, whitening, transmittance, light scatter, discolouration/discoloration, performance, quality, material, biocompatibility, calcification, explantation and ultraviolet/UV radiation. Relevant in-article references not returned in our searches were also considered.Results:After review of the available articles, the authors included 122 publications in this review, based on the quality of their methodology and their originality. The studies included in this review were randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case-controlled studies, case series, case reports, laboratory studies and review papers. Differing material degradations of intraocular lenses have been described and their associated pathophysiology studied. Reported anomalies include photochemical alterations, water vacuoles, internal and surface calcific deposits, surface coatings and discolouration. The nature of such changes has been shown to depend on the type of intraocular lenses material used and/or manufacturing processes and storage conditions employed. Changes in the intraocular lens can also be influenced by surgical technique, coexisting ocular pathologies and topical and systemic medications. The clinical significance of these degradations is variable, with some resulting in significant visual disturbance and the need for intraocular lens explantation and others producing only minimal visual impairments. Failure to recognize the precise nature of the problem may lead to unnecessary laser capsulotomy procedures.Conclusion:Clinical degradations of intraocular lenses are uncommon but have been reported following the implantation of intraocular lenses made of differing biomaterials. Their correct identification and thorough investigation to determine the underlying cause is necessary for optimal patient management and the prevention of such problems. Choosing a lens made of a particular material may be important in patients with certain ocular conditions.

show abstract

“…Not only cataract extraction itself but also satisfactory postoperative refractive results are mandatory for good visual function. Moreover, artificial lens material has improved over time and complication rates have decreased [ 1 , 2 ]. Therefore, the expectations of patients undergoing cataract surgery are almost the same as those for refractive surgery, although preoperative astigmatism of more than 1.5 dioptres (D) is present in 20% of all cataract patients [ 3 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Two Toric IOL Calculation Methods

Kern

Kortüm

Müller

et al. 2018

Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To compare two calculators for toric intraocular lens (IOL) calculation and to evaluate the prediction of refractive outcome. Methods Sixty-four eyes of forty-five patients underwent cataract surgery followed by implantation of a toric intraocular lens (Zeiss Torbi 709 M) calculated by a standard industry calculator using front keratometry values. Prediction error, median absolute error, and refractive astigmatism error were evaluated for the standard calculator. The predicted postoperative refraction and toric lens power values were evaluated and compared after postoperative recalculation using the Barrett calculator. Results We observed a significant undercorrection in the spherical equivalent (0.19 D) by using a standard calculator (p ≤ 0.05). According to the Baylor nomogram and the refractive influence of posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA), undercorrection of the cylinder was lower for patients with WTR astigmatism, because of the tendency of overcorrection. An advantage of less residual postoperative SE, sphere, and cylinder for the Barrett calculator was observed when retrospectively comparing the calculated predicted postoperative refraction between calculators (p ≤ 0.01). Conclusion Consideration of only corneal front keratometric values for toric lens calculation may lead to postoperative undercorrection of astigmatism. The prediction of postoperative refractive outcome can be improved by using appropriate methods of adjustment in order to take PCA into account.

show abstract

Suppression of surface light scattering in intraocular lenses manufactured using an improved production process

Abstract: None of the authors has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

Cited by 6 publications

References 15 publications

A narrative review of intraocular lens opacifications: update 2020

A narrative review of intraocular lens opacifications: update 2020

Clinical and material degradations of intraocular lenses: A review

Comparison of Two Toric IOL Calculation Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About