Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Comparison of epilenticular IOL implantation vs technique of anterior and primary posterior capsulorhexis with anterior vitrectomy in paediatric cataract surgery.
Eye (Lond). 2007 Nov; 21(11):1367-74.E

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the functional outcome of epilenticular intraocular lens (IOL) implantation vs the technique of anterior continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis (ACCC), posterior continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis (PCCC) with vitrectomy and in-the-bag IOL implantation in paediatric cataract surgery.

METHODS

Forty eyes of 33 children with developmental or traumatic cataract, whose mean age was 2-12 years, were randomly divided into two groups A and B. Group A patients underwent epilenticular IOL implantation while in group B patients, ACCC, PCCC with anterior vitrectomy with in-the-bag IOL implantation was performed. Equal number of eyes (10 each) with developmental cataracts (subgroups A1 and B1) and traumatic cataracts (subgroups A2 and B2) were allotted to both the groups. Postoperative visual acuity, opacification of the visual axis, and possible complications were observed and analysed.

RESULTS

Four eyes in subgroup B2 had fibrous or ruptured capsules, and were managed by epilenticular IOL implantation technique. One eye in subgroup B2 developed central posterior capsular opacification and hence required a secondary capsulotomy. All cases in group A maintained a clear visual axis at the last follow-up. Minimal postoperative inflammation was noticed in all groups, which subsided with anti-inflammatory medication. At the last follow-up, all eyes in group A gained visual acuity >/=6/18. Whereas in group B, visual acuity >/=6/18 was obtained in 85.7% cases with the epilenticular IOL implantation technique and in 83.3% cases with ACCC and PCCC with anterior vitrectomy technique.

CONCLUSION

Epilenticular IOL implantation offers a safe and effective alternative for management of paediatric cataract. In selected cases of traumatic cataract, it is the preferred treatment modality.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Pediatric Ophthalmology Service, Guru Nanak Eye Centre, Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, India. dranjurastogi@yahoo.co.inNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial

Language

eng

PubMed ID

16763657

Citation

Rastogi, A, et al. "Comparison of Epilenticular IOL Implantation Vs Technique of Anterior and Primary Posterior Capsulorhexis With Anterior Vitrectomy in Paediatric Cataract Surgery." Eye (London, England), vol. 21, no. 11, 2007, pp. 1367-74.
Rastogi A, Monga S, Khurana C, et al. Comparison of epilenticular IOL implantation vs technique of anterior and primary posterior capsulorhexis with anterior vitrectomy in paediatric cataract surgery. Eye (Lond). 2007;21(11):1367-74.
Rastogi, A., Monga, S., Khurana, C., & Anand, K. (2007). Comparison of epilenticular IOL implantation vs technique of anterior and primary posterior capsulorhexis with anterior vitrectomy in paediatric cataract surgery. Eye (London, England), 21(11), 1367-74.
Rastogi A, et al. Comparison of Epilenticular IOL Implantation Vs Technique of Anterior and Primary Posterior Capsulorhexis With Anterior Vitrectomy in Paediatric Cataract Surgery. Eye (Lond). 2007;21(11):1367-74. PubMed PMID: 16763657.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparison of epilenticular IOL implantation vs technique of anterior and primary posterior capsulorhexis with anterior vitrectomy in paediatric cataract surgery. AU - Rastogi,A, AU - Monga,S, AU - Khurana,C, AU - Anand,K, Y1 - 2006/06/09/ PY - 2006/6/10/pubmed PY - 2008/2/28/medline PY - 2006/6/10/entrez SP - 1367 EP - 74 JF - Eye (London, England) JO - Eye (Lond) VL - 21 IS - 11 N2 - PURPOSE: To compare the functional outcome of epilenticular intraocular lens (IOL) implantation vs the technique of anterior continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis (ACCC), posterior continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis (PCCC) with vitrectomy and in-the-bag IOL implantation in paediatric cataract surgery. METHODS: Forty eyes of 33 children with developmental or traumatic cataract, whose mean age was 2-12 years, were randomly divided into two groups A and B. Group A patients underwent epilenticular IOL implantation while in group B patients, ACCC, PCCC with anterior vitrectomy with in-the-bag IOL implantation was performed. Equal number of eyes (10 each) with developmental cataracts (subgroups A1 and B1) and traumatic cataracts (subgroups A2 and B2) were allotted to both the groups. Postoperative visual acuity, opacification of the visual axis, and possible complications were observed and analysed. RESULTS: Four eyes in subgroup B2 had fibrous or ruptured capsules, and were managed by epilenticular IOL implantation technique. One eye in subgroup B2 developed central posterior capsular opacification and hence required a secondary capsulotomy. All cases in group A maintained a clear visual axis at the last follow-up. Minimal postoperative inflammation was noticed in all groups, which subsided with anti-inflammatory medication. At the last follow-up, all eyes in group A gained visual acuity >/=6/18. Whereas in group B, visual acuity >/=6/18 was obtained in 85.7% cases with the epilenticular IOL implantation technique and in 83.3% cases with ACCC and PCCC with anterior vitrectomy technique. CONCLUSION: Epilenticular IOL implantation offers a safe and effective alternative for management of paediatric cataract. In selected cases of traumatic cataract, it is the preferred treatment modality. SN - 0950-222X UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/16763657/Comparison_of_epilenticular_IOL_implantation_vs_technique_of_anterior_and_primary_posterior_capsulorhexis_with_anterior_vitrectomy_in_paediatric_cataract_surgery_ L2 - https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.eye.6702451 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -