Limits...
Toric intraocular lens orientation and residual refractive astigmatism: an analysis

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To analyze intraocular lens (IOL) orientation data from an online toric back-calculator (astigmatismfix.com) for determining if differences were apparent by lens type.

Methods: A retrospective review of astigmatismfix.com toric back-calculations that included IOL identification and intended orientation axis.

Results: Of 12,812 total validated calculation records, 8,229 included intended orientation and lens identification data. Of the latter, 5,674 calculations (69%) involved lenses oriented 5° or more from their intended position. Using estimated toric lens usage data, the percentage of lenses with orientation ≥5° from intended was 0.89% overall, but the percentage varied significantly between specific toric lens brands (P<0.05). The percentage of back-calculations related to lenses that were not oriented as intended was also statistically significantly different by lens brand (P<0.05). When IOLs were misoriented, they were significantly more likely to be misoriented in a counterclockwise direction (P<0.05). This was found to be due to a bias toward counterclockwise orientation observed with one specific brand, a bias that was not observed with the other three brands analyzed here.

Conclusion: The percentage of eyes with lens orientation ≥5° from intended in the Toric Results Analyzer data set was <1% of toric IOLs in general, with the relative percentage of Tecnis® Toric IOLs significantly higher than AcrySof® Toric IOLs. Both of these had higher rates than the Staar® Toric and Trulign® Toric lenses, with the availability of higher Tecnis and AcrySof cylinder powers a likely contributing factor. The AcrySof Toric IOL appears to be less likely than the Tecnis Toric IOL to cause residual astigmatism as a result of misorientation. The Tecnis Toric IOL appears more likely to be misoriented in a counterclockwise direction; no such bias was observed with the AcrySof Toric, the Trulign® Toric, or the Staar Toric IOLs.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Online toric back-calculations as a percentage of estimated lens usage in the USA by group.Notes: Group A, AcrySof® Toric (Alcon Laboratories, Inc, Fort Worth, TX, USA); group T, Tecnis® Toric (Abbott Medical Optics Inc., Santa Ana, CA, USA); group S, Staar® Toric (Staar Surgical Company, Monrovia, CA, USA); and group B, Trulign® Toric (Bausch & Lomb Surgical, Inc., Rancho Cucamonga, USA).Abbreviations: IOL, intraocular lens; Q1, January 1 to March 31; Q2, April 1 to June 30; Q3, July 1 to September 30; Q4, October 1 to December 31.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5036610&req=5

f2-opth-10-1829: Online toric back-calculations as a percentage of estimated lens usage in the USA by group.Notes: Group A, AcrySof® Toric (Alcon Laboratories, Inc, Fort Worth, TX, USA); group T, Tecnis® Toric (Abbott Medical Optics Inc., Santa Ana, CA, USA); group S, Staar® Toric (Staar Surgical Company, Monrovia, CA, USA); and group B, Trulign® Toric (Bausch & Lomb Surgical, Inc., Rancho Cucamonga, USA).Abbreviations: IOL, intraocular lens; Q1, January 1 to March 31; Q2, April 1 to June 30; Q3, July 1 to September 30; Q4, October 1 to December 31.

Mentions: The time period in which the calculations above were made was from September 2013 to the end of 2015. Figure 2 shows the percentage of toric back-calculations requested by group by quarter for 2014 and 2015, based on the estimated lens usage data for each quarter.11 Average quarterly lens usage volume in the USA in that 2-year period was 54,000 for group A, 12,000 for group T, 4,000 for group B, and 3,000 for group S. Back-calculation percentages are lower, and appear more variable, in the lower volume groups (B and S) over the given time period. Group T lenses were associated with a relatively higher usage of the toric back-calculator.


Toric intraocular lens orientation and residual refractive astigmatism: an analysis
Online toric back-calculations as a percentage of estimated lens usage in the USA by group.Notes: Group A, AcrySof® Toric (Alcon Laboratories, Inc, Fort Worth, TX, USA); group T, Tecnis® Toric (Abbott Medical Optics Inc., Santa Ana, CA, USA); group S, Staar® Toric (Staar Surgical Company, Monrovia, CA, USA); and group B, Trulign® Toric (Bausch & Lomb Surgical, Inc., Rancho Cucamonga, USA).Abbreviations: IOL, intraocular lens; Q1, January 1 to March 31; Q2, April 1 to June 30; Q3, July 1 to September 30; Q4, October 1 to December 31.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5036610&req=5

f2-opth-10-1829: Online toric back-calculations as a percentage of estimated lens usage in the USA by group.Notes: Group A, AcrySof® Toric (Alcon Laboratories, Inc, Fort Worth, TX, USA); group T, Tecnis® Toric (Abbott Medical Optics Inc., Santa Ana, CA, USA); group S, Staar® Toric (Staar Surgical Company, Monrovia, CA, USA); and group B, Trulign® Toric (Bausch & Lomb Surgical, Inc., Rancho Cucamonga, USA).Abbreviations: IOL, intraocular lens; Q1, January 1 to March 31; Q2, April 1 to June 30; Q3, July 1 to September 30; Q4, October 1 to December 31.
Mentions: The time period in which the calculations above were made was from September 2013 to the end of 2015. Figure 2 shows the percentage of toric back-calculations requested by group by quarter for 2014 and 2015, based on the estimated lens usage data for each quarter.11 Average quarterly lens usage volume in the USA in that 2-year period was 54,000 for group A, 12,000 for group T, 4,000 for group B, and 3,000 for group S. Back-calculation percentages are lower, and appear more variable, in the lower volume groups (B and S) over the given time period. Group T lenses were associated with a relatively higher usage of the toric back-calculator.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To analyze intraocular lens (IOL) orientation data from an online toric back-calculator (astigmatismfix.com) for determining if differences were apparent by lens type.

Methods: A retrospective review of astigmatismfix.com toric back-calculations that included IOL identification and intended orientation axis.

Results: Of 12,812 total validated calculation records, 8,229 included intended orientation and lens identification data. Of the latter, 5,674 calculations (69%) involved lenses oriented 5° or more from their intended position. Using estimated toric lens usage data, the percentage of lenses with orientation ≥5° from intended was 0.89% overall, but the percentage varied significantly between specific toric lens brands (P<0.05). The percentage of back-calculations related to lenses that were not oriented as intended was also statistically significantly different by lens brand (P<0.05). When IOLs were misoriented, they were significantly more likely to be misoriented in a counterclockwise direction (P<0.05). This was found to be due to a bias toward counterclockwise orientation observed with one specific brand, a bias that was not observed with the other three brands analyzed here.

Conclusion: The percentage of eyes with lens orientation ≥5° from intended in the Toric Results Analyzer data set was <1% of toric IOLs in general, with the relative percentage of Tecnis® Toric IOLs significantly higher than AcrySof® Toric IOLs. Both of these had higher rates than the Staar® Toric and Trulign® Toric lenses, with the availability of higher Tecnis and AcrySof cylinder powers a likely contributing factor. The AcrySof Toric IOL appears to be less likely than the Tecnis Toric IOL to cause residual astigmatism as a result of misorientation. The Tecnis Toric IOL appears more likely to be misoriented in a counterclockwise direction; no such bias was observed with the AcrySof Toric, the Trulign® Toric, or the Staar Toric IOLs.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus