Uveal and capsular biocompatibility after implantation of sharp-edged hydrophilic acrylic, hydrophobic acrylic, and silicone intraocular lenses in eyes with pseudoexfoliation syndrome

Abstract

To evaluate the uveal and capsular biocompatibility of 3 types of sharp-edged foldable intraocular lenses (IOLs) in eyes with pseudoexfoliation syndrome (PEX). Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. Eighty-five eyes with PEX had implantation of 1 of the following sharp-edged 3-piece IOLs: hydrophilic acrylic (Injectacryl F3000, OphthalMed), hydrophobic acrylic (AcrySof MA60MB, Alcon), or silicone (CeeOn 911, AMO). Postoperative evaluation (flare, cellular reaction, and capsular reaction) was performed at 1, 3, and 7 days as well as 1, 3, 6, and 12 to 18 months. One year after surgery, flare was comparable between the IOLs. In terms of uveal biocompatibility, whereas the Injectacryl had the highest deposition of debris on the IOL surface (P = .04), the CeeOn 911 had significantly more small round cells in the first 6 months (P<.03). The AcrySof had the highest number of foreign-body giant cells (P = .01). In terms of capsular biocompatibility, lens epithelial cell outgrowth was highest in the AcrySof group (P<.02). Anterior capsule opacification was comparable between the 3 groups. Posterior capsule opacification was mild in all groups but was significantly greater in the Injectacryl group (P<.05). There were no cases of clinically significant IOL decentration or capsule contraction. In general, inflammatory cells accumulated more easily on hydrophobic IOLs than on hydrophilic IOLs; the AcrySof IOL had the highest prevalence of foreign-body giant cells. All 3 IOLs had good biocompatibility, although the AcrySof group had increased inflammatory signs.