Author/Authors :
Mohammad-Rabei, Hossein Ophthalmic Research Center - Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Mohammad-Rabei, Elham Department of Orthodontics - School of Dentistry - Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Espandar, Goldis Ophthalmic Research Center - Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Javadi, Mohammad Ali Ophthalmic Research Center - Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Jafarinasab, Mohammad Reza Ophthalmic Epidemiology Research Center - Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Hashemian, Javad Eye Research Center - Rassoul Akram Hospital - Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Feizi, Sepehr Ocular Tissue Engineering Research Center - Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract :
Purpose: To compare the safety and efficacy of three methods for correcting pre‑existing astigmatism
during phacoemulsification.
Methods: This prospective, comparative, non‑randomized study was conducted from March 2010 to
January 2011, and included patients with keratometric astigmatism ≥1.25 D undergoing cataract surgery.
Astigmatism was corrected using the following approaches: limbal relaxing incisions (LRI) on the steep
meridian, extension and suturing of the phaco incision created at the steep meridian (extended‑on‑axis
incision, EOAI), and toric intraocular lens (tIOL) implantation. Keratometric and refractive astigmatism
were evaluated 1, 8, and 24 weeks postoperatively.
Results: Eighty‑three eyes of 72 patients (35 male and 37 female) with mean age of 62.4 ± 14.3 (range, 41‑86)
years were enrolled. The astigmatism was corrected by using the LRI, EOAI and tIOL implantation methods
in 17, 33 and 33 eyes, respectively. Postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was significantly
improved in all three groups. The difference in postoperative UDVA was not statistically significant among
the study groups throughout follow‑up except at week 24, when UCVA was significantly better in the tIOL
group as compared to the EOAI group (P = 0.024). There is no statistically significant difference of correction
index and index of success between three groups at week 24 (P = 0.085 and P = 0.085 respectively).
Conclusion: There was no significant difference in astigmatism reduction among the three methods of astigmatism
correction during phacoemulsification. Each of these methods can be used at the discretion of the surgeon.
Keywords :
Astigmatism Correction , Extended‑on‑axis Incision , Limbal Relaxing Incision , Phacoemulsification , Toric Intraocular Lens