Cargando…

Comparison between Limbal and Pars Plana Approaches Using Microincision Vitrectomy for Removal of Congenital Cataracts with Primary Intraocular Lens Implantation

Purpose. To compare the surgical outcomes of limbal versus pars plana vitrectomy using the 23-gauge microincision system for removal of congenital cataracts with primary intraocular lens implantation. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed all eyes that underwent cataract removal through limbal or par...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Xin, Zheng, Tianyu, Zhou, Xingtao, Lu, Yi, Zhou, Peng, Fan, Fan, Luo, Yi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4904112/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27313872
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/8951053
_version_ 1782437098327900160
author Liu, Xin
Zheng, Tianyu
Zhou, Xingtao
Lu, Yi
Zhou, Peng
Fan, Fan
Luo, Yi
author_facet Liu, Xin
Zheng, Tianyu
Zhou, Xingtao
Lu, Yi
Zhou, Peng
Fan, Fan
Luo, Yi
author_sort Liu, Xin
collection PubMed
description Purpose. To compare the surgical outcomes of limbal versus pars plana vitrectomy using the 23-gauge microincision system for removal of congenital cataracts with primary intraocular lens implantation. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed all eyes that underwent cataract removal through limbal or pars plana incision. Main outcome measures included visual outcomes and complications. Results. We included 40 eyes (26 patients) in the limbal group and 41 eyes (30 patients) in the pars plana group. The mean age was 46 months. There was no significant difference in best-corrected visual acuity between the two groups (P = 0.64). Significantly, more eyes had at least one intraoperative complication in the limbal group than in the pars plana group (P = 0.03) that were mainly distributed at 1.5–3 years of age (P = 0.01). The most common intraoperative complications were iris aspiration, iris prolapse, and iris injury. More eyes in the limbal group had postoperative complications and required additional intraocular surgery, but the difference was not significant (P = 0.19). Conclusions. The visual results were encouraging in both approaches. We recommend the pars plana approach for lower incidence of complications. The limbal approach should be reserved for children older than 3 years of age and caution should be exercised to minimize iris disturbance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4904112
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49041122016-06-16 Comparison between Limbal and Pars Plana Approaches Using Microincision Vitrectomy for Removal of Congenital Cataracts with Primary Intraocular Lens Implantation Liu, Xin Zheng, Tianyu Zhou, Xingtao Lu, Yi Zhou, Peng Fan, Fan Luo, Yi J Ophthalmol Clinical Study Purpose. To compare the surgical outcomes of limbal versus pars plana vitrectomy using the 23-gauge microincision system for removal of congenital cataracts with primary intraocular lens implantation. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed all eyes that underwent cataract removal through limbal or pars plana incision. Main outcome measures included visual outcomes and complications. Results. We included 40 eyes (26 patients) in the limbal group and 41 eyes (30 patients) in the pars plana group. The mean age was 46 months. There was no significant difference in best-corrected visual acuity between the two groups (P = 0.64). Significantly, more eyes had at least one intraoperative complication in the limbal group than in the pars plana group (P = 0.03) that were mainly distributed at 1.5–3 years of age (P = 0.01). The most common intraoperative complications were iris aspiration, iris prolapse, and iris injury. More eyes in the limbal group had postoperative complications and required additional intraocular surgery, but the difference was not significant (P = 0.19). Conclusions. The visual results were encouraging in both approaches. We recommend the pars plana approach for lower incidence of complications. The limbal approach should be reserved for children older than 3 years of age and caution should be exercised to minimize iris disturbance. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2016 2016-05-30 /pmc/articles/PMC4904112/ /pubmed/27313872 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/8951053 Text en Copyright © 2016 Xin Liu et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Study
Liu, Xin
Zheng, Tianyu
Zhou, Xingtao
Lu, Yi
Zhou, Peng
Fan, Fan
Luo, Yi
Comparison between Limbal and Pars Plana Approaches Using Microincision Vitrectomy for Removal of Congenital Cataracts with Primary Intraocular Lens Implantation
title Comparison between Limbal and Pars Plana Approaches Using Microincision Vitrectomy for Removal of Congenital Cataracts with Primary Intraocular Lens Implantation
title_full Comparison between Limbal and Pars Plana Approaches Using Microincision Vitrectomy for Removal of Congenital Cataracts with Primary Intraocular Lens Implantation
title_fullStr Comparison between Limbal and Pars Plana Approaches Using Microincision Vitrectomy for Removal of Congenital Cataracts with Primary Intraocular Lens Implantation
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between Limbal and Pars Plana Approaches Using Microincision Vitrectomy for Removal of Congenital Cataracts with Primary Intraocular Lens Implantation
title_short Comparison between Limbal and Pars Plana Approaches Using Microincision Vitrectomy for Removal of Congenital Cataracts with Primary Intraocular Lens Implantation
title_sort comparison between limbal and pars plana approaches using microincision vitrectomy for removal of congenital cataracts with primary intraocular lens implantation
topic Clinical Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4904112/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27313872
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/8951053
work_keys_str_mv AT liuxin comparisonbetweenlimbalandparsplanaapproachesusingmicroincisionvitrectomyforremovalofcongenitalcataractswithprimaryintraocularlensimplantation
AT zhengtianyu comparisonbetweenlimbalandparsplanaapproachesusingmicroincisionvitrectomyforremovalofcongenitalcataractswithprimaryintraocularlensimplantation
AT zhouxingtao comparisonbetweenlimbalandparsplanaapproachesusingmicroincisionvitrectomyforremovalofcongenitalcataractswithprimaryintraocularlensimplantation
AT luyi comparisonbetweenlimbalandparsplanaapproachesusingmicroincisionvitrectomyforremovalofcongenitalcataractswithprimaryintraocularlensimplantation
AT zhoupeng comparisonbetweenlimbalandparsplanaapproachesusingmicroincisionvitrectomyforremovalofcongenitalcataractswithprimaryintraocularlensimplantation
AT fanfan comparisonbetweenlimbalandparsplanaapproachesusingmicroincisionvitrectomyforremovalofcongenitalcataractswithprimaryintraocularlensimplantation
AT luoyi comparisonbetweenlimbalandparsplanaapproachesusingmicroincisionvitrectomyforremovalofcongenitalcataractswithprimaryintraocularlensimplantation