Posters

Analysis of 200 explanted intraocular lenses: reasons for explantation and risk profile

Poster Details

First Author: T.Yildirim GERMANY

Co Author(s):    T. Neuhann   H. Son   P. Merz   R. Khoramnia   G. Auffarth        

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To analyse and statistically evaluate the reasons for IOL explantation taking into account various factors such as IOL type, design and time the IOL had been in the eye prior to explantation.

Setting:

The David J Apple International Laboratory for Ocular Pathology, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

Methods:

We analysed 200 IOLs that were submitted after explanation to the David J. Apple International Laboratory for Ocular Pathology during one year (2016). Each lens was recorded in a database, light microscopy was performed and the results photo documented. Histological staining was used to identify deposits on the surface and within the IOL. In cases where obvious material defects or opacifications were present, the lenses were further analysed using scanning electron microscopy as well as energy dispersive X-Ray spectroscopy.

Results:

144 lenses were explanted due to postoperative IOL calcification. The remaining 56 lenses had different reasons for explantation such as IOL luxation, patient dissatisfaction with postoperative results and, in case of phakic IOLs, cataract formation. There were no cases of explantation due to inflammatory reaction. 115 IOLs were from one manufacturer. The average time the IOLs had been in the eye prior to explantation was 5.7 years and the average patient age was 63.2 years.

Conclusions:

In our study postoperative IOL calcification was the most common reason for explantation of an IOL. One of the leading reasons for explantation in previous studies, IOL luxation, was only seen in 7,5% of all cases.

Financial Disclosure:

receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, travel has been funded, fully or partially, by a competing company, travel has been funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, research is funded, fully or partially, by a competing company, research is funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, receives non-monetary benefits from a competing company., receives non-monetary benefits from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented., receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a competing company