Pediatric cataract surgery with hydrophilic acrylic intraocular lens

Guy Kleinmann*, Brian Zaugg, David J. Apple, Jamal Bleik

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Purpose To assess the outcomes after hydrophilic acrylic intraocular lens (IOL) implantation during pediatric cataract surgery. Methods This was a retrospective chart review of children who underwent cataract surgery or secondary IOL implantation at Beirut Eye Specialist Centre, Rizk Hospital, between March 2002 and August 2007. Results A total of 57 eyes of 40 patients (20 boys) were included in this study. The average age at surgery was 48 ± 40 months (range, 5-172 months). Of these, 54 eyes had congenital or developmental cataracts and 3 eyes had traumatic cataracts. Primary cataract removal and IOL implantation accounted for 45 surgeries, and secondary IOL implantation accounted for 12 surgeries. Hydrophilic acrylic IOLs were implanted in all surgeries. Average follow-up time was 47 ± 21 months (range, 9-97 months). No intraoperative complications were recorded. Of the 57 eyes, 12 (21%) had postoperative complications, but only 7 (12%) required secondary intervention. Average best-corrected visual acuity improved from 2.0 ± 1.0 logMAR preoperatively to 0.8 ± 1.0 logMAR at last follow-up. Improved visual acuity was observed in 47 eyes (82.5%); 31 eyes (54.4%) had a visual acuity of ≥20/40 at the last follow-up. Conclusions Hydrophilic acrylic IOLs appear to be suitable for use in pediatric cataract surgery. Results from this study suggest that, compared with hydrophobic IOLs, these IOLs produce similar complication rates, secondary intervention rates, and visual acuity results.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)367-370
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of AAPOS
Volume17
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Pediatric cataract surgery with hydrophilic acrylic intraocular lens'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this