A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Visual outcomes and complications following posterior iris-claw aphakic intraocular lens implantation combined with penetrating keratoplasty. | LitMetric

Background: To evaluate the indication, visual outcome, and complication rate after implantation of a posterior iris-claw aphakic intraocular lens (IOL) during penetrating keratoplasty.

Methods: This retrospective study comprised 23 eyes (23 patients) without adequate capsule support undergoing posterior iris-claw aphakic IOL implantation (Verisyse/Artisan) during penetrating keratoplasty between 2005 and 2010. Mean follow-up was 18 months (range from 12 to 37 months).

Results: The IOLs were inserted during an IOL exchange in 17 eyes and as a secondary procedure in six aphakic eyes. Pseudophakic bullous keratopathy with corneal scar after anterior chamber intraocular lens (ACIOL) was the main indication for penetrating keratoplasty in 16 eyes (69.6 %). The final corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) in logMAR (mean 1.0 ± 0.46) improved significantly (p < 0.05) compared to the preoperative CDVA (mean 1.8 ± 0.73). Twenty eyes (86.9 %) had a final visual acuity in logMAR better than the pre-operative CDVA. The mean postoperative IOP 16.3 mmHg ± 4.0 was not significantly (p > 0.05) higher compared to the preoperative IOP 15.6 mmHg ± 5.1. Complications included slight temporary pupil ovalization in three eyes (13.0 %) and iris-claw IOL sublocation in three eyes (13.0 %); all IOLs could be easily repositioned. Cystoid macular edema occured in one eye (4.3 %) 8 weeks after primary surgery. All grafts remained clear without any sign of graft rejection.

Conclusions: Retropupillar iris-claw IOL during penetrating keratoplasty provides good visual outcomes with a favorable complication rate, and can be used for a wide range of indications in eyes without adequate capsule support.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00417-012-2226-yDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

penetrating keratoplasty
16
posterior iris-claw
12
iris-claw aphakic
12
intraocular lens
12
visual outcomes
8
aphakic intraocular
8
complication rate
8
iol penetrating
8
eyes
8
adequate capsule
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!