Intraocular lens exchange due to incorrect lens power.

PURPOSE To evaluate patients who had intraocular lens (IOL) exchange for unexpected postoperative refractive errors, determine the sources associated with the errors, and derive an empiric approach to estimating the power for IOL exchange. DESIGN Retrospective review of interventional case series. PARTICIPANTS Twenty-two eyes that underwent IOL exchange for correcting unexpected refractive errors after cataract surgery with IOL implantation were reviewed. INTERVENTION All the IOLs for IOL exchange were placed in-the-bag. The same type of IOLs was used for original IOL implantation and IOL exchange in 91% (20/22) of eyes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Uncorrected visual acuity, best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), refraction, and reasons for IOL exchange. The equation derived from refractive change and change in IOL power was developed to calculate IOL power for exchange. RESULTS Of the 22 cases, the identified reasons were keratometry errors in 5 (23%) and incorrect axial length (AL) determination in 3 (14%). In 3 other cases, a wrong IOL was implanted. After IOL exchange, 82% (18/22) of eyes were within +/-0.50 diopters (D) and 86% (19/22) within +/-1.00 D of emmetropia. Uncorrected visual acuity was 20/40 or better in 82% of eyes, and BSCVA was 20/40 or better in 95% (21/22) of eyes. The correlation between change of refraction and IOL power was significant (P<0.002). CONCLUSIONS Among the identified causes, incorrect corneal power determination was the most frequent reason for incorrect IOL power implantation, followed by error in AL measurement and inserting a wrong IOL. The pre-exchange refraction can be used theoretically to calculate the IOL power for exchange.

[1]  R. Hoffman,et al.  Immersion A‐scan compared with partial coherence interferometry: Outcomes analysis , 2002, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[2]  A. Crandall,et al.  Changing indications for and improving outcomes of intraocular lens exchange. , 2005, American journal of ophthalmology.

[3]  Randall J. Olson,et al.  Accuracy and reproducibility of biometry using partial coherence interferometry , 2002, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[4]  J. Alió,et al.  Laser in situ keratomileusis to correct residual myopia after cataract surgery. , 2001, Journal of refractive surgery.

[5]  J T Holladay,et al.  Achieving emmetropia in extremely short eyes with two piggyback posterior chamber intraocular lenses. , 1996, Ophthalmology.

[6]  N. Tanaka,et al.  Elevated intraocular pressure in secondary piggyback intraocular lens implantation. , 2005, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[7]  T. Olsen,et al.  Sources of error in intraocular lens power calculation , 1992, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[8]  W. C. Stewart,et al.  Intraocular lens complications requiring removal or exchange. , 1998, Survey of ophthalmology.

[9]  Frank G. Mullins Focal points , 1971, IEEE Spectrum.

[10]  J. Gayton,et al.  Neodymium:YAG treatment of interlenticular opacification in a secondary piggyback case. , 2001, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[11]  W. Drexler,et al.  Comparison of anterior chamber depth measurement methods in phakic and pseudophakic eyes , 2003, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[12]  D. Apple,et al.  Analysis of elements of interlenticular opacification. , 2002, American journal of ophthalmology.

[13]  Y. Hara,et al.  Dioptric changes in eyes with reversed intraocular lenses , 2005, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[14]  E. Briganti,et al.  Laser in situ keratomileusis for refractive error after cataract surgery , 2005, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[15]  N Mamalis,et al.  Complications of foldable intraocular lenses requiring explantation or secondary intervention—2000 survey update , 2000, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[16]  J. Gayton,et al.  Implanting two posterior chamber intraocular lenses in a case of microphthalmos , 1993, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[17]  D. Apple,et al.  Interlenticular opacification: clinicopathological correlation of a complication of posterior chamber piggyback intraocular lenses. , 2000, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[18]  J. Gills,et al.  Minus-power intraocular lenses to correct refractive errors in myopic pseudophakia. , 1999, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[19]  J. Stevens,et al.  Errors leading to unexpected pseudophakic ametropia , 2001, Eye.

[20]  N. Mamalis Intraocular lens power accuracy: how are we doing? , 2003, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[21]  T. Olsen,et al.  IOL power mislabelling , 1993, Acta ophthalmologica.

[22]  S. Gallagher,et al.  Refractive error consequences of reversed-optic AMO SI-40NB intraocular lens. , 1999, Ophthalmology.

[23]  I. Barequet,et al.  Refractive results with secondary piggyback implantation to correct pseudophakic refractive errors , 2005, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[24]  D. Koch,et al.  Comparison of intraocular lens power calculation methods in eyes that have undergone LASIK. , 2004, Ophthalmology.

[25]  J. Gayton,et al.  Piggybacking intraocular implants to correct pseudophakic refractive error. , 1999, Ophthalmology.

[26]  A. Broman,et al.  Excimer laser surgery for correction of ametropia after cataract surgery , 2005, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[27]  N. Mamalis,et al.  Cataract treatment in the beginning of the 21st century. , 2003, American journal of ophthalmology.