Skip to main content
Log in

Additive Intraokularlinsen: Ein Überblick

Supplementary intraocular lenses: Overview

  • themenschwerpunkt
  • Published:
Spektrum der Augenheilkunde Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

In den letzten Jahren werden additive Intraokularlinsen zur Korrektur pseudophaker Ametropien immer häufiger verwendet. In solchen Fällen stellt die sekundäre Implantation einer zweiten, sulcusfixierten IOL eine Alternative zu einem aufwendigen Linsentausch oder einem refraktiven Lasereingriff dar.

Ursprünglich wurden zwei Intraokularlinsen (IOLs) in den Kapselsack implantiert, doch im postoperativen Verlauf kam es sehr häufig zu einer therapierefraktären „interlentikulären Opazifizierung“. Diese Komplikation kann vermieden werden, indem die erste IOL in den Kapselsack und die zweite IOL in den Sulkus ciliaris gesetzt wird.

Eine weitere Komplikation, welche durch diese Implantationstechnik vermieden werden kann, ist die Entstehung zweier Brennpunkte bedingt durch eine Abflachung der Linsenoberflächen im Bereich des Kontaktes beider IOLs. Dadurch kommt es zur Abnahme der Gesamtbrechkraft im Bereich der Kontaktzone beider Linsen.

Um die Nachteile der Polypseudophakie mit herkömmlichen bikonvexen Linsen zu vermeiden und den hohen refraktiven Ansprüchen der Patienten/Innen gerecht zu werden, wurden spezielle additive IOLs konstruiert. Ziel war es ein ausgereiftes Linsensystem zu entwickeln welches ein breites Indikationsspektrum bietet. Außerdem sollte die Linse einfach zu implantieren und gut verträglich sein. Ein Überblick über die Indikationsmöglichkeiten soll die Einsatzmöglichkeiten dieser reversiblen Technik beleuchten.

Summary

Supplementary intraocular lenses are getting popular to correct pseudophakic refractive errors. Today’s supplementary IOLs are highly effective and provide a reversible alternative to laser enhancement and ensure that IOL-exchange can be avoided when postoperative refractive surprise occurs. Use of such lenses makes it possible to correct post-operative ametropia, residual astigmatism and achieve spectacle independence.

Three such models of additive IOLs are available on the European market (1stQ Add-on, Human Optics Add-on and Rayner Sulcoflex). All additive lenses are designed with a large, round-edged optic which has a concave posterior surface and a large overall diameter with round-edged, undulating haptics. Supplementary IOLs can be implanted during the primary cataract surgery as part of a ‘duet’ procedure. This is indicated in cases of very high ametropia, for astigmatism corrections, and to enable the possibility of de-converting from a multifocal to monofocal IOL. Implantation can alternatively be performed after the eye has healed from the implantation of a primary IOL but still requires spherical or astigmatic correction, or conversion from monofocal to multifocal.

Advantages of supplementary IOLs include excellent safety, biocompatibility, reversibility, less trauma than IOL-exchange, and established reliability of results arising from over 20,000 implantations performed to date worldwide. Predictability of postoperative refraction is also high with supplementary IOLs. Overall, supplementary IOLs are an effective option for enhancing the surgical result of pseudophakic eyes or for primary “duet implantation”.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3

Literatur

  1. Gayton JL, Sanders VN. Implanting two posterior chamber intraocular lenses in a case of microphthalmos. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1993;19(6):776–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Shugar JK, Lewis C, Lee A. Implantation of multiple foldable acrylic posterior chamber lenses in the capsular bag for high hyperopia. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1996;22:1368–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Holladay JT, Gills JP, Leidlein J, Cherchio M. Achieving emmetropia in extremely short eyes with two piggyback posterior chamber intraocular lenses. Ophthalmology. 1996;103:1118–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Shugar JK, Lewis C, Lee A. Implantation of multiple foldable acrylic posterior chamber lenses in the capsular bag for high hyperopia. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1996;22:1368–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gills JP, Gayton JL, Raanan M. Multiple intraocular lens implantation. In: Gills JP, Fenzel R, Martin RG (Hrsg.). Cataract surgery: the state of the Art. Thorofare: Slack; 1998. S. 183–95.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gayton JL, Apple DJ, Peng Q, Visessook N, Sanders V, Werner L, Pandey SK, Escobar-Gomez M, Hoddinott DS, Van Der Karr M. Interlenticular opacification: clinicopathological correlation of a complication of posterior chamber piggyback intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000;26(3):330–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Shugar JK, Schwartz T. Interpseudophakos Elschnig pearls associated with late hyperopic shift: a complication of piggyback posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1999;25(6):863–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fenzl RE, Gills JP 3rd, Gills JP. Piggyback intraocular lens implantation. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2000;11(1):73–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Baumeister M, Kohnen T. Scheimpflug measurement of intraocular lens position after piggyback implantation of foldable intraocular lenses in eyes with high hyperopia. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006;32(12):2098–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Almond MC, Wu MC, Chen PP. Pigment dispersion and chronic intraocular pressure elevation after sulcus placement of 3‑piece acrylic intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35(12):2164–6. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.06.039.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Scharioth GB. New add-on intraocular lens for patients with age-related macular degeneration. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015;41(8):1559–63. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.07.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Chang DH, Hardten DR. Refractive surgery after corneal transplantation. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2005;16(4):251–5. doi:10.1097/01.icu.0000170523.80775.e7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Petermeier K, Suesskind D, Altpeter E, Schatz A, Messias A, Gekeler F, Szurman P. Sulcus anatomy and diameter in pseudophakic eyes and correlation with biometric data: evaluation with a 50 MHz ultrasound biomicroscope. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012;38(6):986–91. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.12.027.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Günal Kahraman.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

G. Kahraman, B. Wetzel, C. Bernhart und M. Amon geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kahraman, G., Wetzel, B., Bernhart, C. et al. Additive Intraokularlinsen: Ein Überblick. Spektrum Augenheilkd. 30, 222–226 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00717-016-0317-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00717-016-0317-6

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation