Abstract
ABSTRACT The aim of this prospective study was to compare the clinical efficiency of two different kinds of intraocular lenses. By randomization, 40 patients received an intraocular lens either made of HEMA (hydroxyethylmethacrylate) or PMMA (Polymethylmethacrylate). 20 patients were assigned to each group. Age varied from 60 to 79 years. Follow up periode was 12 months. Posterior synechiae were more frequent in the PMMA group. This was statistically significant. One week postoperatively slightly more intraocular reaction was observed in the HEMA group. On the other hand PMMA lenses had higher incidence of precipitates. These differences however were not found to be statistically significant The analysis showed no difference in the visual acuity ratings in the groups at 12 months (VA 6/9 or better in 95%). Our conclusion is that the soft HEMA lens is a safe alternative to the rigid PMMA lens and probably more biocompatible to the eye.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
