TY - JOUR
T1 - Infantile cataract
T2 - comparison of two surgical approaches
AU - Khatib, Nur
AU - Tsumi, Erez
AU - Baidousi, Amjad
AU - Nussinovitch, Hanan
AU - Bilenko, Natalya
AU - Lifshitz, Tova
AU - Levy, Jaime
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Canadian Ophthalmological Society
PY - 2017/10/1
Y1 - 2017/10/1
N2 - Objective To compare the results of 2 cataract extraction techniques with primary intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in children. Design Retrospective comparative case series study. Methods This study included children with congenital or developmental cataract. In all cases, anterior capsulorhexis, lens aspiration, posterior continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis, and primary IOL implantation were performed. We compared 2 surgical approaches. In the first approach, after IOL implantation in the bag, posterior optic capture (OC) was performed without anterior vitrectomy (OC technique); in the second approach, anterior vitrectomy was performed without OC of the IOL (AV technique). Patient demographic data as well as ethnic origin, child's age at cataract diagnosis, child's age at surgery, axial length, IOL power in diopters, visual acuity, visual axis opacification, and complications were assessed. Results One hundred twenty-three eyes were included for surgical approach outcomes comparison; 21 eyes underwent the OC surgical approach and 102 the AV surgical approach. The mean patient age at surgery was 57.3 ± 47.1 months. The mean follow-up was 63.13 months (range 12–202 months). Epithelial lens reproliferation was the major adverse event in our series, affecting 21.1% of patients’ eyes; the mean time to epithelial lens reproliferation development was 90 ± 9.70 months. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in best spectacle-corrected visual acuity or epithelial lens reproliferation incidence. Conclusions In our case series we did not find any difference between surgical techniques.
AB - Objective To compare the results of 2 cataract extraction techniques with primary intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in children. Design Retrospective comparative case series study. Methods This study included children with congenital or developmental cataract. In all cases, anterior capsulorhexis, lens aspiration, posterior continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis, and primary IOL implantation were performed. We compared 2 surgical approaches. In the first approach, after IOL implantation in the bag, posterior optic capture (OC) was performed without anterior vitrectomy (OC technique); in the second approach, anterior vitrectomy was performed without OC of the IOL (AV technique). Patient demographic data as well as ethnic origin, child's age at cataract diagnosis, child's age at surgery, axial length, IOL power in diopters, visual acuity, visual axis opacification, and complications were assessed. Results One hundred twenty-three eyes were included for surgical approach outcomes comparison; 21 eyes underwent the OC surgical approach and 102 the AV surgical approach. The mean patient age at surgery was 57.3 ± 47.1 months. The mean follow-up was 63.13 months (range 12–202 months). Epithelial lens reproliferation was the major adverse event in our series, affecting 21.1% of patients’ eyes; the mean time to epithelial lens reproliferation development was 90 ± 9.70 months. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in best spectacle-corrected visual acuity or epithelial lens reproliferation incidence. Conclusions In our case series we did not find any difference between surgical techniques.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021800157&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jcjo.2017.02.023
DO - 10.1016/j.jcjo.2017.02.023
M3 - Article
C2 - 28985816
AN - SCOPUS:85021800157
SN - 0008-4182
VL - 52
SP - 527
EP - 532
JO - Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology
JF - Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology
IS - 5
ER -