[Optical quality after 2.2mm microincisional cataract surgery with bimanual I/A in 154 eyes]

Should Artificial Tears Be Used During the Preoperative Assessment of Toric IOLs Before Age-Related Cataract Surgery? The TORIDE Study

PURPOSE

To assess the impact of the use of artificial tears during the preoperative work-up performed before age-related cataract surgery, when a toric intraocular lens (IOL) was indicated.

METHODS

This was a monocentric prospective study assessing 73 eyes of 51 patients, included consecutively after a preoperative work-up performed without artificial tears (no artificial tears group), when a toric IOL was indicated. Each included patient underwent a second series of examinations: biometry using the IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) and topography using the OPD-Scan II (Nidek), 1 minute after artificial tears instillation (artificial tears group; hyaluronate de sodium 0.15%, threalose 3% [Théalose; Théa]). Changes in anterior corneal astigmatism and subsequent changes in toric IOL calculation were analyzed. The error in predicted residual astigmatism was calculated.

RESULTS

Anterior corneal astigmatism and total corneal astigmatism measured with the IOLMaster 700 were significantly modified when artificial tears were instilled before the examinations (1.51 ± 0.57 diopters [D], range: 0.75 to -3.55 vs 1.42 ± 0.63 D, range: 0.42 to 3.35 D; P = .043 and 1.59 ± 0.54 D, range: 0.87 to 3.48 vs 1.51 ± 0.59 D, range: 0.56 to 3.27 D, P = .038, respectively). This modification led to a change in IOL cylinder calculation in 43.8% of cases and to a change in implantation axis greater than 10° in 17.7% of cases. These changes were significantly greater in patients with a breakup time (BUT) less than 5 seconds (57.5% and 27.8%, with P = .009 and .029, respectively). In the subgroup of patients with a BUT of less than 5 seconds, the mean absolute error in predicted astigmatism was significantly lower after artificial tears instillation (0.48 ± 0.50 D, range: 0.00 to 2.79 vs 0.37 ± 0.25 D, range: 0.00 to 1.10 D, P = .048).

CONCLUSIONS

Dry eye significantly impacted toric IOL calculations and should be taken into account during the preoperative assessments. Using artificial tears reduced the number of refractive errors. [J Refract Surg. 2021;37(11):759-766.].

Impact of measured total keratometry versus anterior keratometry on the refractive outcomes of the AT TORBI 709-MP toric intraocular lens

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the visual and refractive outcomes of total keratometry (TK) versus anterior keratometry (AK) measurements of the IOLMaster 700® (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany) in surgery for age-related cataract with preexisting corneal astigmatism.

METHODS

Monocentric retrospective comparative study. The IOLMaster 700® biometer was used in the 2 groups: in AK mode (AK group) and in TK mode (TK group), for toric IOL (AT TORBI 709 MP) calculation with ZCALC®, Zeiss toric IOL calculator. A 2:1 matching was made between the AK and TK groups. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), the correction index and the error in predicted residual astigmatism were analyzed 1 month postoperatively using the vector analysis by the Alpins method.

RESULTS

The whole cohort included 405 eyes distributed as follows after 2:1 matching: 158 eyes in the AK group and 79 eyes in the TK group. The mean UDVA was similar in both groups (0.07 ± 0.10 LogMAR; p = 0.587). No significant difference in mean absolute error in predicted residual astigmatism (0.37 ± 0.33 D versus 0.35 ± 0.26 D; p = 0.545) and in mean centroid error in predicted residual astigmatism (0.19 ± 0.49 at 3° and 0.06 ± 0.46 at 0°; p = 0.008 and 0.161 respectively for the x- and y-components) was found between the AK and TK groups.

CONCLUSION

TK of the IOLMaster 700® gives excellent refractive and visual outcomes, comparable to those obtained in AK mode, without showing its superiority for corneas with regular astigmatism.

[Toric lens implantation in cataract surgery: Automatic versus manual horizontal axis marking, analysis of 50 cases]

SUBJECT

The main objective of our study is to evaluate the contribution of automated conjunctival recognition in the alignment of toric implants by comparing the automatic alignment optimized with Callisto™ to the manual marking of the horizontal axis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a prospective, descriptive, and monocentric study on patients undergoing cataract surgery with toric implantation (Asphina 709 Zeiss), operated by a surgeon with good experience in toricity, between September 2016 and March 2017. We analyzed the agreement between the manual marking of the 0°-180° axis versus the one automatically generated by the Callisto™, as well as the alignment of the IOL and the refractive results at 1 month.

RESULTS

We included 50 eyes of 26 patients. The corrected mean astigmatism was 1.9 D. The mean difference between the 2 axes was 4.7° [0°-12.3°]. Only 50 % of the preoperative manual markings were consistent with the automatic measurement (<5°). At one month, the average rotation recorded was 4.3° [0°-29°]. The alignment was identical for 70 % (n=35) of the IOL (≤5°). As for residual subjective astigmatism, it was on average 0.58 D. The mean visual acuity without correction was 8/10 and 55 % had 10/10 without correction.

DISCUSSION

The refractive performance depends on the preoperative measurement, the correct alignment of the IOL and its stability in the bag. Our study shows the value of automatic conjunctival recognition in the determination of the axis of peroperative alignment, even in an experienced operator. This precision is essential for a good refractive result, especially since the residual astigmatism in case of misalignment will increase with the power of the implant.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows excellent refractive results, whatever the initial astigmatism, using the automatic alignment. The precision of the toric implantation opens the way to the toric multifocal implantation under the best conditions.

Toric lens implantation in cataract surgery: Automated versus manual horizontal axis marking, analysis of 50 cases

SUBJECT

The main objective of our study was to evaluate the contribution of automated conjunctival registration in the alignment of toric intraocular lenses by comparing automated registration optimized with Callisto^® to manual marking of the horizontal axis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a prospective, descriptive, monocentric study on patients undergoing cataract surgery with a toric intraocular lens (Asphina 709 Zeiss), performed by a surgeon with good experience in toric implants, between September 2016 and March 2017. We analyzed the agreement between the manual marking of the 0-180° axis versus the one automatically generated by the Callisto™, as well as the alignment of the IOL and the refractive results at 1 month.

RESULTS

We included 50 eyes of 38 patients. The mean corrected astigmatism was 1,9 D. The mean difference between the 2 axes was 4,7° [0-12.3°]. Only 50 % of the preoperative manual markings were consistent with the automated measurement (<5°). At one month, the mean rotation recorded was 4,3° [0-29°]. The alignment was identical for 70 % (n=35) of the IOLs (≤5°). As for residual subjective astigmatism, the mean was 0.58 D. The mean visual acuity without correction was 8/10 and 55 % saw 10/10 without correction.

DISCUSSION

Refractive performance depends on preoperative measurement, correct alignment of the IOL and its stability in the bag. Our study shows the value of automated conjunctival registration in the determination of the intraoperative axis of alignment, even with an experienced surgeon. This precision is essential for a good refractive result, especially since residual astigmatism in the case of misalignment will increase with the power of the implant.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows excellent refractive results, regardless of the initial astigmatism, using automated alignment. Precision of toric implantation opens the way to toric multifocal implantation under the best conditions.