Posters

Comparative assessment of commercially available preloaded monofocal IOL injectors

Poster Details

First Author: I.Singh USA

Co Author(s):                        

Abstract Details

Purpose:

Ex-vivo assessment of commercially available preloaded monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) injectors in artificial aphakic eyes

Setting:

Prospective, single-site, comparative laboratory study

Methods:

All tests were performed by a single cataract surgeon. Three preloaded injectors (MX60PL, B&L; PCB00, J&J; AU00T, Alcon) and one non-preloaded injector (BLIS-R1, B&L) were used. All injectors were prepared and advanced into the nozzle and held in the compressed state for 3, 5, and 15 minutes prior to delivery. A 2.4mm clear corneal incision was created for each condition in artificial aphakic eyes and all IOLs were delivered into the bag. IOL preparation time, IOL delivery speed/control, OVD usage, IOL position, optic quality, and need for second instrument were all assessed for each condition. All cases were video recorded.

Results:

MX60PL and AU00T had the quickest loading time and PCB00 was the slowest in the preloaded group (average time: 18.11, 18.83, 22.7 secs respectively). The non-preloaded control, BLIS-R1 took the longest at 35.3 secs. All injectors demonstrated good delivery speed, control, and minimal OVD usage for preparation (~0.23ml). All IOLs were successfully delivered into the bag, except for one case with PCB00 that was delivered partially outside. Two cases needed a second instrument (PCB00-partial delivery, AU00T-stuck haptic). BLIS and MX60PL were easier to insert, PCB00 was not as smooth, and AU00T required more force because of the plunger design.

Conclusions:

In this ex-vivo study, all preloaded injectors demonstrated good efficiency when compared to the non-preloaded control injector. All preloaded injectors showed good delivery control and speed, but only MX60PL had no complications with in the bag delivery and did not require a second instrument.

Financial Disclosure:

receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented