Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Retrospective case series reveals equivalent visual acuity and rotational stability between V4 and V4c toric lenses, indicating the central hole design preserves refractive performance.
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and rotational stability after implantation of two types of toric implantable collamer lenses (Toric ICL™(TICL);V4 and V4c, STAAR Surgical Co.). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated total 48 eyes of 48 patients who underwent the implantation with V4 and V4c TICL with a central hole; A twenty-four eyes of 24 patients with V4 TICL and 24 eyes of 24 patients with V4c TICL with a central hole. Visual acuity, manifest refraction, and intraocular pressure were evaluated before and after surgery. Rotational stability (disparity between the intended axis and achieved axis) was assessed in both groups using digital anterior segment photographs, and vector analysis was also performed. RESULTS: Uncorrected visual acuity improved in both groups without significant difference (P = .111). There were no statistical differences between two groups in postoperative SE and cylindrical errors (P = .067 and .384, respectively). The mean value of rotation was 4.17±3.31° and 3.39±2.36° in the V4 and V4c TICL groups, respectively without significant difference (P = .364). Vector analysis of astigmatic correction showed no significant diffrence between two groups. CONCLUSION: V4 and V4c TICL have similar efficacy with regard to visual acuity and refractive outcomes and rotational stability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hyun et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: