Posters

Effect of intraocular lens biomaterial on posterior capsule opacification: long-term real-world clinical practice evidence from large population based studies

Poster Details

First Author: L.Zhaohui CHINA

Co Author(s):    M. Dhariwal                    

Abstract Details

Purpose:

Posterior Capsular Opacification (PCO) involves lens epithelial cell proliferation and capsular fibrosis, resulting in visual obstruction. Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy treats PCO but leads to additional healthcare resource utilization. Longitudinal real world evidence (RWE) studies can provide long-term outcomes for large cohorts of patients and reflect routine clinical practice.

Setting:

Literature Review of published evidence.

Methods:

The present study is an overview of recently available RWE studies (N=3) on long-term PCO/Nd:YAG outcomes due to different IOLs.

Results:

In Finland, a retrospective-cohort study (Lindholm 2019) estimated cumulative Nd:YAG incidence (2007-2016,N=10,044) and showed that AcrySof IOLs had 38% reduced Nd:YAG risk vs Tecnis ZCB00 (P less than 0.001). In UK, a retrospective-cohort study (Ursell 2018) using NHS cataract-clinics data (2010-2016,N=52,162) showed significantly-lower 3-years Nd:YAG incidence for single-piece hydrophobic AcrySof IOL vs. other hydrophobic and hydrophilic IOLs (P less than 0.001). A healthcare-claims data analysis (Kossack 2017) conducted in Region Bavaria (Germany) assessed impact of different IOLs on PCO (2010-2014,N=3,025). Findings indicated statistically significantly lower Nd:YAG risk in hydrophobic vs. hydrophilic IOLs (P less than 0.0001) upto 4-years post-cataract surgery.

Conclusions:

Three robust RWE studies show that Hydrophobic IOLs are associated with a significantly lower risk of PCO requiring Nd:YAG capsulotomy vs. hydrophilic IOLs. In two studies, AcrySof IOLs were associated with significantly lower YAG capsulotomy incidence vs. Tecnis ZCB00.

Financial Disclosure:

is employed by a for-profit company with an interest in the subject of the presentation, receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a competing company