ePoster

All ePoster presentations will be available to view anytime throughout the Meeting in an Online Library

Title:

In phakic implantable collamer lens: why do we reverse or replace?

Poster Details

First Author: G. Alarfaj SAUDI ARABIA

Co Author(s):    H. Bin Helayel   F. Al-Zahir   J. Hariri   M. Al Subaie   N. Sulaimani        

Abstract Details

Purpose:

Research aim to find the incidence of ICL explanation/ exchange in specialized eye hospital in Saudi Arabia and the associated causes

Setting:

Dhahran Eye Specialist Hospital (DESH) during the period from 2015 till 2019

Methods:

The institutional review board at DESH approved this retrospective study. Demographic and preoperative and postoperative biometric data of all cases that underwent ICL implantation were collected, analyzed, and correlated to the outcome. The primary outcome was the rate of ICL explantation and the secondary outcome was the rate of postoperative complication after ICL implantation.

Results:

Of 819 ICLs implanted, 14 ICLs (1.7%)were explantd and 11 ICLs (1.3% ) were exchanged. Commonest cause was incorrect WTW measurements 7 (0.9%). Among the 55 (6.7%) high vault eyes only 4 (0.5%) needed explanation or exchange. Refractive surprise was third in order 3 (0.4% ). None of the cases had complications in the intraoperative or post operative period of the explanation or exchange of the ICL. Irreversible damage from glaucoma or retinal complications happened in one patient for each condition with a percentage of only 0.1%

Conclusions:

ICL is considered a safe procedure and stands out as being reversible compared to other refractive procedures. We advise to use both the caliber and rotating Scheimpflug camera to measure the WTW and improve accuracy.

Financial Disclosure:

None