Cargando…

Surgical management of intraocular lens dislocation: A meta-analysis

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of intraocular lens (IOL) repositioning and IOL exchange for the treatment of patients with IOL dislocation. METHODS: We systematically searched for relevant publications in English or Chinese in MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yang, Shangfei, Nie, Kailai, Jiang, Hui, Feng, Liwen, Fan, Wei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6382138/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30785910
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211489
_version_ 1783396616190820352
author Yang, Shangfei
Nie, Kailai
Jiang, Hui
Feng, Liwen
Fan, Wei
author_facet Yang, Shangfei
Nie, Kailai
Jiang, Hui
Feng, Liwen
Fan, Wei
author_sort Yang, Shangfei
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of intraocular lens (IOL) repositioning and IOL exchange for the treatment of patients with IOL dislocation. METHODS: We systematically searched for relevant publications in English or Chinese in MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, WHO International Clinical Trial Registration Platform, Clinical Trial.gov, China Biology Medicine Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database and grey literature sources. Study quality was assessed using the STROBE template for observational studies and the Cochrane template for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data were meta-analyzed using RevMan 5.3. RESULTS: The review included 14 English-language studies reporting 1 RCT and 13 retrospective case series involving 1,082 eyes. Average follow-up time was 13.7 months. Pooled analysis of 10 studies showed that the two procedures had a similarly effect on best corrected visual acuity (MD -0.00, 95%CI: -0.08 to 0.08, P = 0.99). Pooled analysis of nine studies showed no significant difference in incidence of IOL redislocation (RR 2.12, 95%CI 0.85 to 5.30, P = 0.11); pooled analysis of seven studies showed greater extent of incidence of cystoid macular edema in IOL exchange (RR 0.47, 95%CI 0.21 to 1.30, P = 0.06). Pooled analysis of three studies showed greater extent of incidence of anterior vitrectomy in IOL exchange (RR 0.11, 95%CI 0.04 to 0.33, P<0.0001). Pooled analysis of two studies showed greater postoperative spherical equivalents in IOL repositioning (MD 1.02, 95%CI 0.51 to 1.52, P<0.0001). pooled analysis suggested no significant differences between the two procedures in terms of intraocular pressure, endothelial cell density, surgically induced astigmatism, or incidence of retinal detachment, intraocular hemorrhage or pupillary block. CONCLUSION: IOL repositioning and exchange are safe and effective procedures for treating IOL dislocation. Neither procedure significantly affects best corrected visual acuity and IOL redislocation. IOL exchange was superior to repositioning in terms of postoperative SE, but IOL repositioning was associated with lower incidence of anterior vitrectomy, potentially lower incidence of cystoid macular edema.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6382138
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63821382019-03-01 Surgical management of intraocular lens dislocation: A meta-analysis Yang, Shangfei Nie, Kailai Jiang, Hui Feng, Liwen Fan, Wei PLoS One Research Article PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of intraocular lens (IOL) repositioning and IOL exchange for the treatment of patients with IOL dislocation. METHODS: We systematically searched for relevant publications in English or Chinese in MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, WHO International Clinical Trial Registration Platform, Clinical Trial.gov, China Biology Medicine Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database and grey literature sources. Study quality was assessed using the STROBE template for observational studies and the Cochrane template for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data were meta-analyzed using RevMan 5.3. RESULTS: The review included 14 English-language studies reporting 1 RCT and 13 retrospective case series involving 1,082 eyes. Average follow-up time was 13.7 months. Pooled analysis of 10 studies showed that the two procedures had a similarly effect on best corrected visual acuity (MD -0.00, 95%CI: -0.08 to 0.08, P = 0.99). Pooled analysis of nine studies showed no significant difference in incidence of IOL redislocation (RR 2.12, 95%CI 0.85 to 5.30, P = 0.11); pooled analysis of seven studies showed greater extent of incidence of cystoid macular edema in IOL exchange (RR 0.47, 95%CI 0.21 to 1.30, P = 0.06). Pooled analysis of three studies showed greater extent of incidence of anterior vitrectomy in IOL exchange (RR 0.11, 95%CI 0.04 to 0.33, P<0.0001). Pooled analysis of two studies showed greater postoperative spherical equivalents in IOL repositioning (MD 1.02, 95%CI 0.51 to 1.52, P<0.0001). pooled analysis suggested no significant differences between the two procedures in terms of intraocular pressure, endothelial cell density, surgically induced astigmatism, or incidence of retinal detachment, intraocular hemorrhage or pupillary block. CONCLUSION: IOL repositioning and exchange are safe and effective procedures for treating IOL dislocation. Neither procedure significantly affects best corrected visual acuity and IOL redislocation. IOL exchange was superior to repositioning in terms of postoperative SE, but IOL repositioning was associated with lower incidence of anterior vitrectomy, potentially lower incidence of cystoid macular edema. Public Library of Science 2019-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6382138/ /pubmed/30785910 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211489 Text en © 2019 Yang et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Yang, Shangfei
Nie, Kailai
Jiang, Hui
Feng, Liwen
Fan, Wei
Surgical management of intraocular lens dislocation: A meta-analysis
title Surgical management of intraocular lens dislocation: A meta-analysis
title_full Surgical management of intraocular lens dislocation: A meta-analysis
title_fullStr Surgical management of intraocular lens dislocation: A meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Surgical management of intraocular lens dislocation: A meta-analysis
title_short Surgical management of intraocular lens dislocation: A meta-analysis
title_sort surgical management of intraocular lens dislocation: a meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6382138/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30785910
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211489
work_keys_str_mv AT yangshangfei surgicalmanagementofintraocularlensdislocationametaanalysis
AT niekailai surgicalmanagementofintraocularlensdislocationametaanalysis
AT jianghui surgicalmanagementofintraocularlensdislocationametaanalysis
AT fengliwen surgicalmanagementofintraocularlensdislocationametaanalysis
AT fanwei surgicalmanagementofintraocularlensdislocationametaanalysis