Posters

Bag-in-the-lens versus lens-in-the-bag or sulcus implantation in cataract surgery in disabled persons

Poster Details

First Author: H.Bailleul FRANCE

Co Author(s):    C. Billotte   E. Denion   A. Lux              

Abstract Details

Purpose:

The prevalence of cataract in patients with disabilities is 12% and affect patients at a younger age. The patient’s examination is often limited by their cooperation. Surgical management of cataract or its complications requires general anesthesia. The purpose of this study is to compare the rate of reoperation between Bag-In-the-Lens (BIL) implantation and in the bag or sulcus implantations in this population

Setting:

Caen University Hospital, Department of Ophthalmology, Caen, France

Methods:

This retrospective study included all patients with disabilities who had undergone cataract surgery under general anesthesia between 2009 and 2019 in Caen University Hospital, with a minimal 3-month follow-up. Two groups were created : BIL group (BIL implantation) and NO BIL group (in the bag or sulcus implantations). The BIL IOL implantation consist of the creation of a posterior continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis equal in size to the anterior capsulorhexis. Both capsulorhexis are inserted in the interhaptic groove of the BIL IOL, ruling out visual axis opacification. The Visual Symptoms Learning Disability (VSLD) score assessed of the clinical benefit after surgery.

Results:

60 eyes of 36 patients were included: 38 eyes of 24 patients in the BIL group and 22 eyes of 12 patients in the NO BIL group. Our study shows a trend towards a decrease in the reintervention rate in the BIL group (8%) compared to the NO BIL group (14%), with no statistically significant difference (p=0.6594). The VSLD score is 8.05 in the BIL group and 8.75 in the NO BIL group (p=0.23). The rate of anterior implant dislocation is higher in this population (8.3% in the BIL group and 4.5% in the NO BIL group.

Conclusions:

BIL implantation in patients with disabilities appears to decrease the rate of reintervention. The benefit in terms of visual ability is equivalent in both groups. The high rate of lens dislocation is probably due to eye rubbing in this population. The knowledge of it helps sensibilizing the carers of its prevention.

Financial Disclosure:

None