UNASSIGNED: Cataract surgery is one of the most common surgical procedures performed worldwide. Intraocular lens (IOL) implants are placed routinely in the capsular bag after successful cataract extraction. However, in the absence of adequate capsular support, IOL may be placed in the anterior chamber, fixated to the iris or fixated to the sclera. The purpose of this study is to report the clinical outcomes and safety profile of a trans-scleral sutured intraocular lens (IOL) technique using scleral flaps, vitrectomy, and Gore-Tex suture to place posterior chamber IOL.
UNASSIGNED: Retrospective, interventional case series of eyes undergoing scleral fixation of an IOL using Gore-Tex suture with concurrent vitrectomy. Ocular examination with the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution visual acuity (logMAR BCVA), tonometry, and slit-lamp biomicroscopy was performed on all patients at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the operation. All post-operative complications were recorded.
UNASSIGNED: Twenty-five eyes of 25 patients were included. Mean logMAR BCVA improved from 0.43 ± 0.36 (20\\40 Snellen equivalent) preoperatively to 0.13 ± 0.18 (20\\25 Snellen equivalent) postoperatively at 12 months (p<0.01). Indications included surgical aphakia (16) and dislocated lens implant (9). No cases of IOL opacification, suprachoroidal haemorrhage, post-operative endophthalmitis, IOL dislocation, Gore-Tex exposure, or retinal detachment were observed during the follow-up period.
UNASSIGNED: Ab externo scleral fixation of IOLs with Gore-Tex suture plus scleral flap is well tolerated and associated with a very low rate of suture exposition. Moreover, our study confirms excellent refractive outcomes after surgery.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of our study was to compare the safety and efficacy of two scleral fixation intraocular lens (IOL) methods of four-point scleral fixation (Akreos AO60) and the Yamane technique (AcrySof MA60AC).
METHODS: This prospective, randomized study was conducted at the Military Institute of Medicine-National Research Institute in Warsaw between 2021 and 2023. We compared both groups for cause of aphakia, ocular history, refractive status, and complication.
RESULTS: Our study included 50 eyes from 47 patients. Four-point fixation was performed in 25 eyes (group 1), and the Yamane technique was used in 25 eyes (group 2). Surgical time was 24.1 min ± 8.9 in group 1 and 25.1 min ± 9.9 in group 2 (p > 0.05). The postoperative BCVA (best-corrected visual acuity) for group 1 and group 2 at 1 year\'s observation was 0.10 ± 0.15 and 0.09 ± 0.17 logMAR, respectively (p > 0.05). Postoperative total refractive error (RE) was - 0.06 ± 0.71 diopters (D) for four-point scleral fixation and 0.83 ± 0.70 D for Yamane technique (p < 0.05). Endothelial cell density (ECD) loss was 0.9% in group 1 and 3.5% in group 2 (p > 0.05). Bleeding into the anterior chamber and vitreous body was more frequent in the group of patients operated on with the use of the Yamane technique (10 cases, 20%, p = 0.01). IOL displacement was found in one case (2%) in group 2.
CONCLUSIONS: Both analyzed techniques are well tolerated and ensure good refractive results (extremely predictable in four-point scleral fixation) and have a similar safety profile. Four-point scleral fixation of IOL would appear to be safe, effective and beneficial for young, active patients, especially after trauma or recurrent subluxation.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT06389643.

OBJECTIVE: To compare visual, anatomical and economical outcomes of patients with secondary anterior chamber intraocular lens (AC-IOL) implantation and secondary scleral fixated intraocular lens (SF-IOL) implantation.
METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, 38 aphakic patients after complicated phacoemulsification divided in two groups, AC-IOL group (17 patients receiving AC-IOL implantation) and SF-IOL group (21 patients receiving SF-IOL implantation). Corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), patient reported visual outcome (VF-14) and endothelial cell density (ECD) were measured at baseline and two-year follow-up. Complication rate was registered. The global cost of each procedure and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated.
RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found in CDVA (logMAR 0.24 ± 0.17 vs. 0.32 ± 0.26, p = 0.27), VF-14 (68 ± 18 vs. 61 ± 20, p = 0.24), ECD (1456.48 ± 525.15 vs. 1341.71 ± 374.33, p = 0.48) and overall complication rate (p = 0.79) postoperatively between the SF-IOL group and the AC-IOL group. The ECD loss rate was significantly higher in the AC-IOL group (15.5% vs. 3.5%, p = 0.004). The average global cost of the two procedures was higher in the SF-IOL group (p < 0.005) and ICER showed an additional payment of 693 € for each patient in SF-IOL group against a saving of 186 endothelial cells 2 years postoperatively.
CONCLUSIONS: AC IOL and SF-IOL implantation showed similar outcomes in terms of visual function and safety profile. Higher ECD loss was found in AC-IOL group. The global cost of implantation was significantly lower for AC-IOL, but the ICER seems to justify the SF-IOL implantation in patients with low ECD.