Intraindividual comparison of capsule behavior of 2 hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lenses during a 5-year follow-up.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the 5-year postoperative anterior (ACO) and posterior capsule opacification (PCO), the occurrence of glistenings, and the level of anterior capsule retraction after implantation of 2 designs of 1-piece hydrophobic acrylic IOLs. SETTING: Hospital St. John, Vienna, Austria. DESIGN: Randomized controlled prospective case series. METHODS: Patients had an Acrysof SA60AT IOL (Group A) implanted in 1 eye and a Tecnis ZCB00 IOL (Group B) implanted in the fellow eye. At 1, 3, and 5 years, the PCO level was evaluated with the Evaluation of Posterior Capsule Opacification software. The level of ACO and capsule retraction was graded subjectively. Glistenings were scored as present or not present. RESULTS: Fifty eyes of 25 patients were evaluated after 5 years. No significant differences in PCO scores were found between the 2 groups at all follow-up visits (1 year: 0.06 ± 0.12 [SD] versus 0.07 ± 0.13, P = .35; 3 years: 0.23 ± 0.36 versus 0.22 ± 0.32, P = .66; 5 years: 0.36 ± 0.41 versus 0.36 ± 0.54, P = .98). A significant increase in PCO score was found between 3 and 5 years (P < .01). Anterior capsule opacification was present in Group A and Group B in 18.0% and 2.7% of eyes (P = .03), in 92.0% and 24.0% of eyes, and in 100% and 52% of eyes (P < .01) at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Glistenings (5 years 100%) were observed in Group A. CONCLUSION: Both IOLs had a comparable PCO rate 5 years after surgery, although more ACO and retraction as well as glistenings were observed in Group A.

Intraindividual comparative analysis of capsule opacification after implantation of 2 single-piece hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lenses models: Three-year follow-up.

PURPOSE: To compare the 3-year postoperative anterior (ACO) and posterior (PCO) capsule opacification and the level of anterior capsule retraction after implantation of 2 single-piece hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lens (IOL) models. SETTING: Hospital of St. John of God, Vienna, Austria. DESIGN: Comparative randomized controlled double-blind clinical trial. METHODS: Eyes with bilateral cataract were evaluated. Each patient had an Acrysof SA60AT (interrupted optic edge) IOL implanted in 1 eye (Group A) and a Tecnis ZCB00 (continuous optic edge) IOL implanted in the fellow eye (Group B). One and 3 years postoperatively, PCO was evaluated using Evaluation of Posterior Capsule Opacification software and the ACO level and capsule-retraction level were evaluated and graded subjectively. RESULTS: The study evaluated 100 eyes of 50 patients ranging from 61 to 80 years. Postoperatively, there were no statistically significant differences in PCO between Group A and Group B at 1 year (0.06 ± 0.12 [SD] and 0.07 ± 0.13, respectively; P = 4.35) or 3 years (0.23 ± 0.36 and 0.22 ± 0.32, respectively; P = .66). In Group A and Group B, ACO was present in 18.0% of eyes and 2.7% of eyes, respectively, at 1 year (P = .03) and in 92.0% and 24.0%, respectively, at 3 years (P < .01). Capsule phimosis (18.0% at 1 year; 30.0% at 3 years) and glistenings (66.0% at 1 year; 86.0% at 3 years) were observed in Group A only. CONCLUSION: Both IOLs had similarly low PCO rates 3 years postoperatively, although more ACO and capsule retraction were observed in eyes with the interrupted optic edge IOL.

Anterior and posterior capsular opacification with the Tecnis ZCB00 and AcrySof SA60AT IOLs: a randomised intraindividual comparison.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the 1-year postoperative levels of posterior capsule opacification (PCO) as well as the level of anterior capsule retraction and opacification (ACO) after implantation of two single-piece hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lens (IOL) models. METHODS: Randomised, controlled, prospective and double-blind study including 148 eyes of 74 patients (age range, 61-80 years) with bilateral senile cataract. Each patient underwent surgery with implantation of an AcrySof SA60AT (Group A) in one eye and Tecnis ZCB00 (Group B) in the fellow eye by the same experienced surgeon. Lens allocation to the first or second operated eye followed a randomisation process. At 12 months postoperatively, the PCO level was evaluated with the Evaluation of Posterior Capsule Opacification software, whereas the level of ACO and capsule retraction was evaluated and graded subjectively. RESULTS: All surgeries were uneventful. The mean PCO scores were 0.10 ± 0.17 and 0.21 ± 0.89 in Groups A and B, respectively, with no statistically significant differences between the groups (p=0.47). No significant correlation was found between the PCO scores in Groups A and B (r=0.16, p=0.17). Regarding ACO, it was present in 15 eyes (20.3%) and two eyes (2.7%) in Groups A and B, respectively (p=0.37). Capsular phimosis (13 eyes, 17.6%) was only observed in Group A. CONCLUSIONS: Both IOLs had a similar low rate of PCO 1 year after surgery. However, there seems to be a difference in the anterior capsule behaviour between both IOL models.