Posters

Comparison between different piggyback intraocular lenses

Poster Details

First Author: H. Nithianandan CANADA

Co Author(s):    E. Santiago   N. Noordeh   Y. Yang   R. Conlon   K. Baig        

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To compare the efficacy and safety of three different types of piggyback intraocular lenses (IOLs) for correction of residual refractive error following cataract surgery

Setting:

University of Ottawa Eye Institute, Ottawa, Canada

Methods:

This study includes eyes undergoing implantation of piggyback IOLs at a single tertiary center including Rayner, Human Optics, and 1stQ. Ethics approval was obtained from The Ottawa Hospital Research Ethics Board. Preoperative, operative and postoperative data were collected. Outcomes assessed include best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), intraocular pressure and manifest refraction. Visual acuity was converted to logMAR. Safety was assessed through intraoperative and postoperative complications. Follow-up intervals were at 1 week, 1 month, 3 month, 6 month and 12 months. Descriptive statistics were performed.

Results:

7 eyes were included with follow up ranging from 1 to 12 months, with 3 eyes receiving Human Optics IOLs, 2 eyes receiving Rayner IOLs and 2 eyes receiving1stQ lenses. Indication for piggyback lens implantation included hyperopic surprise after cataract surgery (n=4), postrefractive ectasia after cataract surgery (n=2) and high astigmatism after penetrating keratoplasty (n=1). The UCVA improved or remained stable in all cases. All eyes achieved BCVA better than 20/40 at the latest follow-ups. The piggyback IOLs in all patients remained well centered during the follow-up period, and there were no intraoperative or postoperative complications.

Conclusions:

Implantation of piggyback lenses is a safe and effective technique to correct residual refractive error after cataracts surgery.

Financial Disclosure:

NONE