Long Term Clinical and Visual Outcomes of Retrofixated Iris Claw Lenses Implantation in Complicated Cases



Sri Ganesh, Sheetal Brar, Kirti Relekar*
Nethradhama Superspeciality Eye Hospital, Bengaluru, India


Article Metrics

CrossRef Citations:
0
Total Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 772
Abstract HTML Views: 420
PDF Downloads: 184
ePub Downloads: 133
Total Views/Downloads: 1509
Unique Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 501
Abstract HTML Views: 217
PDF Downloads: 125
ePub Downloads: 91
Total Views/Downloads: 934



© Ganesh et al.; Licensee Bentham Open.

open-access license: This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/legalcode), which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.

* Address correspondence to this author at 256/14, Kanakapura main road, 7th block, Jayanagar, Bengaluru-560070, India; Tel: 09820516075; Fax: 26633770; E-mail: kirtirelekar@gmail.com


Abstract

Aims:

To evaluate the visual outcomes and complications after implantation of retrofixated iris claw (RFIC) lens in various challenging situations.

Settings and Design:

Retrospective, single centre, 8 year clinical audit.

Materials and Methods:

A retrospective analysis of cases who underwent RFIC lens implantation alone (group 1) or in combination with vitreoretinal (VR), corneal or glaucoma procedures (group 2) was performed. The main outcomes evaluated were corrected distant visual acuity (CDVA) and postoperative complications. The mean follow up was 13.09±6.8 (range 6-24) months.

Results:

The study involved 100 eyes of 83 patients with mean age of 51.1±25.4 years. Group 1 included 59 eyes and group 2 had 41 eyes. In group 1, the mean CDVA improved from 0.86±0.81 to 0.38±0.51 LogMAR (p<0.001) with 72.8% eyes having gain in lines (≥ 2 lines) of CDVA with safety index of 1.73. The mean CDVA in group 2 improved from 0.71±0.65 to 0.38±0.34 LogMAR (p=0.003) with 65.8% eyes having gain in lines (≥ 2 lines) of CDVA with a safety index of 1.54. Group 2 showed a higher complication rate of 36.59% compared to group 1 (20.34%). Significant complications noted were secondary glaucoma (8%), disenclavation of haptic (4%), subluxation of RFIC lens (1%).

Conclusion:

The visual outcome with RFIC lenses when combined with other intraocular procedures is mainly affected by the complexity of co-existing pathologies .The complications are more related to the combined procedures performed rather than RFIC lens implantation alone. This may still be acceptable when complication profile of other intraocular lenses is evaluated in similar challenging situations.

Keywords: Combined, enclavation, intraocular lens, iris claw, retrofixated, vitreoretinal.