ARTICLE

Clinical outcomes and complications following intraocular lens exchange in the setting of an open or intact posterior capsule

Alsetri, Hasan BS; Masket, Samuel MD; Fram, Nicole MD; Sandoval, Hector BS; Cabang, Julieanne BS; McLachlan, Jessie BMed

Author Information

From the Advanced Vision Care, Los Angeles, California (Alsetri, Masket, Fram, Cabang, McLachlan); Stein Eye Institute, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angles, California (Masket, Fram); SUNY Downstate Medical School, Brooklyn, New York (Sandoval).

Corresponding author: Hasan Alsetri, BS, Advanced Vision Care, Suite 911, 2080 Century Park East, Los Angeles, CA 90067. Email: [email protected].

Presented in part at the American Academy of Ophthalmology Annual Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, October 2022.

Disclosures: None of the authors has any financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

First author:Hasan Alsetri, BSAdvanced Vision Care, Los Angeles, California

Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery 49(5):p 499-503, May 2023. | DOI: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001138

Purpose:

To assess whether there are added risks when performing intraocular lens (IOL) exchange in the setting of an open posterior capsule (OPC) when compared with a closed posterior capsule (CPC) IOL exchange.

Setting:

Private practice, Los Angeles, California.

Design:

Nonrandomized and unmasked retrospective chart review.

Methods:

Eyes undergoing IOL exchange solely to relieve optical symptoms, with open or intact posterior capsules, were included. Eyes undergoing IOL exchange due to IOL malposition or dislocation were excluded. Eyes with preexisting, uncontrolled glaucoma and inflammation and eyes with a visual potential worse than 20/40 (Snellen) were also excluded. The main outcome measures were the postoperative complications compared between the OPC and CPC groups.

Results:

90 eyes of 75 patients undergoing IOL exchange were included in this study; 38/90 eyes had an OPC, and 52/90 eyes had a CPC. 3/38 in the OPC group and 2/52 in the CPC group experienced worsening intraocular pressure control. 1/38 in the OPC group experienced chronic inflammation. 2/38 in the OPC group and 2/52 in the CPC group experienced cystoid macular edema. 1/52 in the CPC group experienced a retinal tear. Statistically or clinically significant differences in postoperative complications between the OPC and CPC groups were not found.

Conclusions:

In the hands of an experienced surgeon, IOL exchange with an OPC appear red to be just as safe as IOL exchange with a CPC; when deemed necessary, experienced surgeons may perform an IOL exchange safely in the presence of an OPC.

Secondary Logo

Journal Logo