This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (132)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Intraocular Lenses  • Alert me on articles by topic

Hideyuki Hayashi, MD; Ken Hayashi, MD; Fuminori Nakao, MD; Fumihiko Hayashi, MD

Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116:1579-1582.

Objective  To quantitatively compare the extent of posterior capsule opacification (PCO) after polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), silicone, and soft acrylic intraocular lens implantation.

Patients and Methods  A total of 240 eyes from 240 patients undergoing implant surgery were randomized into 3 groups based on the type of lens implanted: PMMA, silicone, and soft acrylic. The density value of PCO in 185 eyes was quantitated approximately 2 years after surgery by a new measurement method using the Scheimpflug videophotography system.

Results  Twenty-one eyes (30.4%) in the PMMA group, 4 (5.7%) in the silicone group, and 2 (2.7%) in the acrylic group had already undergone Nd:YAG laser posterior capsulotomy. The mean ± SD PCO values were 26.3 ± 12.2 computer-compatible tape steps (CCT) in the PMMA group, 12.0 ± 8.3 CCT in the silicone group, and 16.0 ± 10.3 CCT in the acrylic group. The PCO value in the PMMA group was significantly greater than that in the silicone or acrylic group (P<.001). The visual acuity loss in the PMMA group was also greater than that in the silicone or acrylic group (P<.001).

Conclusion  Based on the PCO value and capsulotomy rate, the PCO was more extensive with the PMMA lens than with either the silicone or soft acrylic lens, which led to visual acuity loss.

From the Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, Fukuoka University (Dr H. Hayashi), and Hayashi Eye Hospital (Drs H. Hayashi, K. Hayashi, Nakao, and F. Hayashi), Fukuoka, Japan. The authors have no proprietary interest in any of the materials described in this article.

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Pentacam Tomograms: A Novel Method for Quantification of Posterior Capsule Opacification
Grewal et al.
IOVS 2008;49:2004-2008.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

In vivo measurement of opacified H60M intraocular lenses using Scheimpflug photography.
Ross et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006;90:1328-1329.
FULL TEXT  

Objective Quantification of Posterior Capsule Opacification after Cataract Surgery, with Optical Coherence Tomography
Moreno-Montanes et al.
IOVS 2005;46:3999-4006.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Single versus three piece acrylic IOLs
Chang
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2004;88:727-728.
FULL TEXT  

Systems of analysis of posterior capsule opacification
Aslam et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2002;86:1181-1186.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Anterior capsule contraction and intraocular lens decentration and tilt after hydrogel lens implantation
Hayashi et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2001;85:1294-1297.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Factoring cost, is phacoemulsification still the procedure of choice?
CHANG
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2001;85:765-766.
FULL TEXT  

Retroillumination versus Reflected-Light Images in the Photographic Assessment of Posterior Capsule Opacification
Camparini et al.
IOVS 2000;41:3074-3079.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Digital Image Capture and Automated Analysis of Posterior Capsular Opacification
Friedman et al.
IOVS 1999;40:1715-1726.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT