Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 1916980

Why go endocapsular?

M R Mehta·V K Dada·A K Singh
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

A prospective randomized clinical trial was carried out to compare the intercapsular or the endocapsular technique of IOL insertion and conventional posterior chamber IOL insertion after can opener capsulotomy. Age and sex matched groups of 76 patients each underwent surgery by the two techniques. The corneal and the uveal reaction was evaluated on the first day after the surgery and specular counts were done at six weeks. Though the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant, a trend in favour of intercapsular technique emerged strongly.

Explore related subjects

Cataract ExtractionCell CountEndothelium, CornealHumansIridocyclitisLens Capsule, CrystallineLenses, IntraocularMiddle AgedPrognosisProspective StudiesClinical TrialComparative StudyJournal ArticleRandomized Controlled Trial

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M R Mehta, V K Dada, A K Singh. Why go endocapsular?. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1916980/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2001

The Manitoba Cataract Waiting List Program.

This article describes the Manitoba Cataract Waiting List Program. This program uses a centralized database to track and prioritize all patients waiting for cataract surgery. It provides an objective and reliable measure of the length of the wait, and patients on the waiting list are treated in a more equitable fashion through application of a uniform method of prioritization. The program will allow for long-term tracking of quality of care through monitoring of the average length of wait for patients with comparable functional impairment. It will also allow for long-term monitoring of thresholds for surgery. It has brought to light previously undocumented issues, such as the simultaneous booking of both eyes for cataract surgery and variations in waiting time between surgeons.

Cataract Extraction↗
PubMed2001

Contrast sensitivity and depth of focus with aspheric multifocal versus conventional monofocal intraocular lens.

BACKGROUND: Laboratoires Domilens, Lyon, France, has introduced a new aspheric multifocal intraocular lens (IOL), the Progress 3. The central portion, measuring 4.7 mm in diameter, has an anterior surface of progressively increasing power, such that there is a central add of +5.00 dioptres. We compared contrast sensitivity and depth of focus in patients who received the Progress 3 and in those who received a conventional monofocal IOL. METHODS: Prospective study. Forty patients with age-related cataract were randomly divided into two groups: 20 patients received the Progress 3 aspheric multifocal IOL, and 20 patients received a conventional monofocal IOL of similar design. Contrast sensitivity was measured with the Pelli-Robson letter-based chart. Depth of focus was determined by dialling a series of overcorrections over the patient's manifest refraction until the patient read 6/12 clearly. The depth of focus was defined as the range over which 6/12 or better acuity was achieved. Quality of vision was evaluated by patient questionnaire. RESULTS: Mean contrast sensitivity was significantly lower in the patients with a multifocal IOL than in those with a monofocal IOL (1.38 vs. 1.56 log units) (p < 0.001). The mean depth of focus values for the two groups were 3.10 D and 1.65 D respectively (p < 0.001). The prevalence of subjective problems was similar in the two groups. INTERPRETATION: In our opinion, aspheric multifocal IOLs should be reserved for patients who are willing to trade increased depth of focus for reduced contrast sensitivity postoperatively.

Cataract Extraction↗