Skip to main content
Log in

Clinical results with three different kinds of small optic PMMA-IOLs

  • Original Papers
  • Published:
International Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this prospective study the clinical results using three different small optic IOLs are presented. The best results were achieved in those cases with an anterior capsule rim overlapping the entire optic periphery. In those cases with sulcus fixation, haptic in/out and optic in/out positions a higher percentage of capsule flbrosis (Soemmering's rings) was documented (sulcus fixation: 100%, haptic in/out position: 75%, optic in/out position: 65.5%, bag: 7.3%). The fibrosis developed because of contact between the anterior and the posterior capsule leaf. These cases also showed decentrations of the intraocular lense (IOL) more often (sulcus fixation: 50%, haptic in/out position: 75%, optic in/out position: 34.5%, bag: 31.7%). Only one patient was disturbed by glare and halo phenomenons. Cellular reactions on the lens surface were moderate in most cases. Differences specific to lens type were found between the three IOLs implanted. The clinical results were comparable to the results of other comprehensive IOL studies. Under certain indication small optic IOLs represent an alternative to flexible implants for small incision surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Allarakhia L, Knoll RL, Linstrom RL. Soft intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 1987; 13: 607–20.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Menapace R, Radax U, Amon M, Papapanos P. No-stitch cataract surgery with flexible lenses. Evaluation of 100 consecutive cases. J Cat Refract Surg 1994; in press.

  3. Menapace R, Amon M, Radax U. Evaluation of 200 consecutive IOGEL 1103 bag-style lenses implanted through a small incision. J Cataract Refract Surg 1992; 18: 252–64.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Crozafon P. Phacoemulsification and small diameter PMMA lenses: A years study of glare and autocentration. Presented at the Eighth Congress of the European Intraocular Implantlens Council, Dublin, 10–14 September, 1990.

  5. Amon M, Menapace R, Papapanos P, Radax U, Vass C. Klinisch, morphologische Ergebnisse mit drei unterschiedlichen PMMA-Hinterkammerlinsen für die KleinschnittKatarak-tchirurgie. Spektrum der Augenheilkunde 1992; 6/6: 273–7.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Amon M. In-vivo documentation of cellular reactions on lenssurfaces for assessing the biocompatibility of different intraocular implants. Spektrum der Augenheilkunde 1992 (Suppl 7); 6/3.

  7. Amon, M, Menapace R. Beurteilung der biologischen VertrÄglichkeit von PMMA-, heparinmodifiziertenPMMA und Hydrogel-Intraokularlinsen mit Hilfe der Spiegelmikroskopie. Klin Mbl Augenheilkd 1992; 2/200: 95–100.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Wenzel M, Reim M, Heinze M, Becking A. Cellular invasion on the surface of intraocular lenses. In vivo cytological observations following lens implantation. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, Springer-Verlag, 1988; 226: 449–54.

  9. Davis PL. Comparison of function and fixation of small incision circular and oval poly(methyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses. J Cat Refract Surg 1992; 18/2: 136–9.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Amon M, Menapace R. Cellular invasion on hydrogel and PMMA lens implants. An in-vivo study. J Cataract Refract Surg 1991; 17: 774–9.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Neumann AC, Cobb B. Advantages and limitations of current soft intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 1989; 15: 257–63.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Vass C, Menapace R, Amon M. über den Einflu\ des optischen IOL Durchmessers auf die KontrastsensitivitÄt und Blendungsempfindlichkeit. Spektrum der Augenheilkunde 1992; 6/5: 211–6.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Apple DJ, Park SB, Merkley KH, Brems RN, Richards SC, Langley KE, Piest KL, Isenberg RA. Posterior chamber intraocular lenses in a series of 75 autopsy eyes part I: Loop location. J Cataract Refract Surg 1986; 12: 358–62.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Mc Donnel PJ, Zarbin MA, Green R. Posterior capsule opacification in pseudophakic eyes. Ophthalmology 1983; 95: 1548–53.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Daicker B. Perilenticular tissue changes caused by intraocular lenses with no history of clinical complications. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 1984; 184: 419–22.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gills JP, Sanders DR. Use of a small incision to control induced astigmatism and inlammation following cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 1991; 8(Suppl): 740–4.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kaiya T. Observation of blood-aqueous barrier function after posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 1990; 16: 320–4.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Amon, M., Menapace, R., Radax, U. et al. Clinical results with three different kinds of small optic PMMA-IOLs. Int Ophthalmol 18, 9–13 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00919407

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00919407

Key words

Navigation