RESEARCH ARTICLE
Clinical Outcomes of Toric Implantable Collamer Lens (T-ICL) and Toric Implantable Phakic Contact Lens (IPCL) for High Myopia with Astigmatism: A Comparative Study
Mohamed Salah El-Din Mahmoud1, Heba Radi AttaAllah1, *
Article Information
Identifiers and Pagination:
Year: 2022Volume: 16
E-location ID: e187436412204050
Publisher ID: e187436412204050
DOI: 10.2174/18743641-v16-e2204050
Article History:
Received Date: 29/6/2021Revision Received Date: 3/11/2021
Acceptance Date: 6/12/2021
Electronic publication date: 31/05/2022
Collection year: 2022
open-access license: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY 4.0), a copy of which is available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Abstract
Background:
Our study aimed to compare the clinical, visual outcomes, and efficacy of toric Implantable Collamer Lens (T-ICL) and toric implantable phakic contact lens (IPCL) in patients with high myopia and astigmatism over a follow-up period of 6 months.
Methods:
A prospective interventional randomized comparative study included 60 myopic eyes divided into 2 groups, group A including 30 eyes that were implanted with T-ICL, and group B, including 30 eyes that were implanted with toric IPCL. The refractive results, visual acuity, central corneal endothelial cell count, and intraocular pressure (IOP) were evaluated at baseline and at 1 and 6 months post-surgery. Any complications either during or after surgery were assessed.
Results:
In both study groups, the mean central corneal endothelial cell count was significantly decreased after 1 month and improved to reach near pre-operative values after 6 months postoperatively, indicating good lens biocompatibility. A statistically significant increase in IOP was found in both groups during the early follow-up, and a significant decrease after 6 months postoperatively (p=0.036) was reported in group A. A significant reduction in both spherical and cylindrical refractive errors with good predictability was reported in both groups compared with pre-operative values. Regarding the predictability, In T-ICL group (A), the median spherical and cylindrical errors were significantly improved from (-10 D & -4.5 D) pre-operatively to (-0.3 D & - 0.3 D) at the end of 6 months follow up period. Similarly, in the toric IPCL group (B), the median spherical and cylindrical errors were significantly improved from (-11 D & -4.5 D) pre-operatively to (-0.3 D & - 0.3 D) by the end of follow up period. A statistically significant improvement of UCDVA at 6 months postoperatively was found in both groups, as median preoperative LogMAR UCDVA was 1.1 and 1.3 in groups A and B respectively, which was improved to 0.3 in both groups at the end of follow-up period. There were no reported intra- or postoperative complications such as cataract, keratitis, or lens decentration.
Conclusion:
Toric IPCL is a suitable alternative to T-ICL for the management of high myopia with astigmatism, especially in developing countries, as it is cheaper and easier to implant than T-ICL. However, data over longer follow-up periods are needed to confirm its safety and stability.
