Abstract
Objective: To compare the clinical outcome of digital and manual marking for toric intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Methods: This prospective randomized control study included one eye each of 80 patients underwent cataract surgery with coexisting corneal astigmatism of more than 1.0 diopter (D). The eyes were randomly assigned to two groups. The observation group, 40 eyes, underwent Verion system assisted phacoemulsification and toric IOL implantation. The control group, 40 eyes, underwent toric IOL implantation with manual slit-lamp assisted preoperative marking. We recorded the uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCDVA), best corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA), and corneal astigmatism before and after surgery, as well as the anticipated and observed residual astigmatism. The follow-up time was 3 months. Means and standard deviations were calculated. Data were performed by t-test, chi-square tests. Results: The mean postoperative UCDVA for the observation group was 0.11 ± 0.11 log minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), and for the control group it was 0.13 ± 0.13 logMAR (t=-0.96, P=0.34). The mean deviation from the targeted induced astigmatism (TIA) for the observation group was 0.12 ± 0.11 D and for the control group it was 0.21 ± 0.12 D (t=-3.71, P=0.001). The mean postoperative toric IOL misalignment measured by the slit lamp was 2.2° ± 1.6° for the observation group and 4.6° ± 3.0° for the control group (t=-3.69, P=0.001). Conclusions: The intraoperative digital guidance of the Verion system provided better toric IOL alignment than did the manual slit-lamp assisted alignment. The Verion system resulted in less postoperative TIA and less postoperative toric IOL misalignment than did the manual-marking technique. Key words: astigmatism; refractive cataract sugery; toric intraocular lenses
Published Version
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 call