RESUMO
Purpose: To report on the visual outcomes of the second-generation (ActivShieldTM) Light Adjustable Lens (LAL) used in cataract surgery for patients with a history of laser refractive surgery (LASIK and/or photorefractive keratectomy [PRK]) using a co-managed, open-access methodology. Patients and Methods: This retrospective case series of consecutive patients with history of laser refractive surgery implanted with the second-generation LAL with an emmetropic target were included in the study. Following surgery, all patients received their ultraviolet (UV) light treatments at a separate open-access facility through a co-managed arrangement. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), spherical equivalent (SE), and residual cylinder for eyes with an emmetropic refractive target were the primary outcome measures as documented at the patient's final, stable, refractive postoperative exam. Results: Thirty-three patients (34 eyes) with a history of laser refractive surgery were included in the study and implanted with the second-generation LAL with a postoperative emmetropic refractive target. Twenty-eight (82.4%) saw 20/20 or better and 9 (26.5%) saw 20/15 or better. The mean SE was 0.01 ± 0.31 D and 33 (97.1%) were within ±0.50 D SE of plano. The mean residual cylinder was -0.28 ± 0.32 D and 30 (88.2%) were within ±0.50 D. Conclusion: Use of the second-generation LAL was efficacious in cataract surgical patients with a history of LASIK and/or PRK using a co-managed, open-access methodology.
RESUMO
Purpose: To report on the safety and visual acuity (VA) outcomes using a co-managed, open-access methodology with a second-generation (ActivShieldTM) Light Adjustable Lens (LAL 2.0). Patients and Methods: This retrospective observational case series of consecutive patients implanted with the LAL 2.0 choosing an emmetropic target in at least one eye were included in the study. All patients were co-managed with light treatments occurring at an open-access facility. Exclusion criteria included pathology of the macula and/or cornea with reduced best corrected visual acuity (BCVA). The primary outcome measures were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), spherical equivalent (SE), and residual cylinder for emmetropic goal eyes at the final 3- to 9-month postoperative visit. Results: Thirty-three patients (62 eyes) were included in the study and implanted with the LAL 2.0. Thirty-three (53.2%) eyes had previous corneal refractive treatment(s) with 22 (66.7%) having no original historical refractive records available. Thirty-six (58.1%) total eyes and 20 (32.3%) postrefractive eyes had an emmetropic refractive target. Of all the emmetropic goal eyes, 35 (97.2%) saw 20/20 or better and 36 (100%) were within ±0.50 D SE of plano and had a mean cylinder of -0.15 ± 0.26 D. Of the postrefractive emmetropic goal eyes, 19 (95%) saw 20/20 or better, 20 (100%) were within ±0.50 D SE of plano and had a mean cylinder of -0.17 ± 0.28 D. Conclusion: A co-managed, open-access methodology using the LAL 2.0 was safe and efficacious even in challenging postrefractive clinical scenarios.