Glyxambi
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 1281
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page

   Table of Contents      
COMMENTARY
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 67  |  Issue : 8  |  Page : 1324-1325

Commentary: Indications and surgical techniques for intraocular lens explantation


Centre for Sight, New Delhi, India

Date of Web Publication22-Jul-2019

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Mahipal S Sachdev
Chairman and Medical Director, Centre for Sight B-5/24, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi - 110 029
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1171_19

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Sachdev MS. Commentary: Indications and surgical techniques for intraocular lens explantation. Indian J Ophthalmol 2019;67:1324-5

How to cite this URL:
Sachdev MS. Commentary: Indications and surgical techniques for intraocular lens explantation. Indian J Ophthalmol [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Dec 14];67:1324-5. Available from: http://www.ijo.in/text.asp?2019/67/8/1324/263109



The first posterior chamber implant was placed by Sir Harold Ridley in the year 1950. Although rare, intraocular lens (IOL) explantation rates vary from 0.03% to 0.77%.[1] The indications for explantation have changed with evolution in cataract extraction techniques and implant characteristics. More common indications for anterior chamber lens explanation include pseudophakic bullous keratopathy, uveitis–glaucoma–hyphema syndrome, and persistent cystoid macular edema. Decentration or dislocation, incorrect IOL power, persistent negative dysphotopsia, implant opacification, and failure to neuroadapt are the most common indications for explantation in posterior chamber implants.[2],[3]

IOL dislocation is secondary to improper fixation within the capsular bag or instability of the bag-implant complex secondary to zonular inadequacy or loss of posterior capsular integrity. Late presentations are secondary to trauma or progressive zonulopathy, such as in pseudo exfoliation syndrome. Lens explantation in these cases may be challenging due to loss of structural integrity of the surrounding tissues. Refractive surprises secondary to errors in biometry are easier to correct as the ocular structures are intact and the interval between the procedures is shorter.

While attempting explantation, the ideal method would entail a procedure which does not distort the original corneal incision and allows safe removal without damaging the surrounding ocular tissues. Refolding the IOL within the anterior chamber and subsequent removal via the original wound is a relatively safe and easy approach.[4] However, at present, the current technique is not suitable for multipiece implants or thick lenses with high powers.

Bisecting or trisecting the implant in the anterior chamber prior to subsequent removal entails extensive surgical manipulations possibly compromising the corneal endothelium and the incisional integrity. In addition, these maneuvers entail IOL stabilization with forceps, providing a single point for applying counter-pressure, with additional risk of slippage or shift.[5]

Silguero Perez et al. describe the use of a novel device with a metal loop wherein the distal segment of the implant optic is sandwiched between the two arms.[6] This allows a two-point support for counter-pressure and superior stability during bisecting maneuvers. In addition, the technique can be applied for explantation of multipiece implants and thicker optic segments.

The important caveats to remember include liberal use of dispersive viscoelastic for corneal endothelium protection, steady maneuvers to prevent damage to surrounding ocular structures, and minimal corneal wound distortion while attempting removal. Additionally, one should be cautious of the effect of the surgical intervention on the capsular bag and surrounding tissues and should consider suitable alternatives including piggy back IOLs and bioptics where indicated.



 
  References Top

1.
Fernandez-Buenaga R, Alio JL. Intraocular lens explantation after cataract surgery: Indications, results and explantation techniques. Asia Pac J Ophthalmol 2017;6:372-80.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Michelson J, Werner L, Ollerton A, Leishman L, Bodnar Z. Light scattering and light transmittance in intraocular lenses explanted because of optic opacification. J Cataract Refract Surg 2012;38:1476-85.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Kamiya K, Hayashi K, Shimizu K, Negishi K, Sato M, Bissen-Miyajima H, et al. Multifocal intraocular lens explantation: A case series of 50 eyes. Am J Ophthalmol 2014;158:215-20.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Bhaumik A, Mitra S. A simple technique of intraocular lenses explantation for single piece foldable lenses. Indian J Ophthalmol 2017;65:1428-30.  Back to cited text no. 4
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
5.
Mamalis N. Complication of foldable intraocular lens requiring explantation or secondary intervention – 1998 survey. J Cataract Refract Surg 2000;26:766-72.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Pérez-Silguero D, Rivero-Santana A. A new device for intraocular lenses explantation. Indian J Ophthalmol 2019;67:1322-4.  Back to cited text no. 6
    




 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed271    
    Printed0    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded90    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal