Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Clinical outcomes after aphakic versus aphakic/pseudophakic intraoperative aberrometry in cataract surgery with toric IOL implantation

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To determine if there was a clinically significant difference in clinical outcomes after toric IOL implantation based on intraoperative aberrometry (IA), where eyes were measured either in the aphakic state only or both the aphakic and pseudophakic states.

Methods

A prospective, randomized, contralateral eye study was performed at one site in Poughkeepsie, NY, USA. Subjects included patients presenting for uncomplicated bilateral cataract surgery eligible for toric lens implantation with regular corneal astigmatism in both eyes whose toric IOL implantation was based on IA. One eye was measured when aphakic and the other when both aphakic and pseudophakic. The primary outcome measure was the magnitude of residual refractive astigmatism. Secondary measures included the percentage of eyes with 0.50D or less of residual refractive astigmatism, the spherical equivalent refraction and the time for IA measurement.

Results

Mean residual refractive astigmatism was not statistically significantly different between groups (0.32D ± 0.46D IA_1 vs. 0.23D ± 0.35D IA_2, p = 0.25), nor was the percentage of eyes with a residual refractive cylinder of 0.50D or less (94% in both groups, p = 1.0). The average time to measure the pseudophakic eye was 3 min, 46 s. Aphakic IA measurements appeared to produce better spherical equivalent refractive results relative to preoperative calculations.

Conclusion

Pseudophakic IA measurements took nearly 4 min per case. Residual refractive astigmatism was not appreciably lower when pseudophakic IA measurements were made after aphakic IA measurements, which suggests aphakic IA measurements alone provide good clinical results with toric IOLs.

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.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abulafia A, Koch DD, Wang L et al (2016) New regression formula for toric intraocular lens calculations. J Cataract Refract Surg 42:663–671

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Davison JA, Potvin R (2015) Refractive cylinder outcomes after calculating toric intraocular lens cylinder power using total corneal refractive power. Clin Ophthalmol 9:1511–1517

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Cionni RJ, Dimalanta R, Breen M, Hamilton C (2018) A large retrospective database analysis comparing outcomes of intraoperative aberrometry with conventional preoperative planning. J Cataract Refract Surg 44:1230–1235

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Woodcock MG, Lehmann R, Cionni RJ, Breen M, Scott MC (2016) Intraoperative aberrometry versus standard preoperative biometry and a toric IOL calculator for bilateral toric IOL implantation with a femtosecond laser: one-month results. J Cataract Refract Surg 42:817–825

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tonn B, Klaproth OK, Kohnen T (2014) Anterior surface-based keratometry compared with Scheimpflug tomography-based total corneal astigmatism. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 56:291–298

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Holladay JT, Pettit G (2019) Improving toric intraocular lens calculations using total surgically induced astigmatism for a 2.5 mm temporal incision. J Cataract Refract Surg 45:272–283

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hill DC, Sudhakar S, Hill CS et al (2017) Intraoperative aberrometry versus preoperative biometry for intraocular lens power selection in axial myopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 43:505–510

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hatch KM, Woodcock EC, Talamo JH (2015) Intraocular lens power selection and positioning with and without intraoperative aberrometry. J Refract Surg 31:237–242

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Solomon JD, Ladas J (2017) Toric outcomes: computer-assisted registration versus intraoperative aberrometry. J Cataract Refract Surg 43:498–504

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lubahn JG, Donaldson KE, Culbertson WW, Yoo SH (2014) Operating times of experienced cataract surgeons beginning femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 40:1773–1776

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Roberts HW, Myerscough J, Borsci S, Ni M, O’Brart DPS (2018) Time and motion studies of National Health Service cataract theatre lists to determine strategies to improve efficiency. Br J Ophthalmol 102:1259–1267

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Sarah Y. Makari, OD is a consultant to Science in Vision who received compensation for writing assistance in preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Satish S. Modi.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

This study was supported with an investigator-initiated study Grant (# 36727981) from Alcon, Forth Worth, USA. Dr. Modi is a consultant to Alcon.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Modi, S.S. Clinical outcomes after aphakic versus aphakic/pseudophakic intraoperative aberrometry in cataract surgery with toric IOL implantation. Int Ophthalmol 40, 3251–3257 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-020-01509-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-020-01509-y

Keywords

Navigation