Surgical management of intraocular lens dislocation: A meta-analysis

PLoS One. 2019 Feb 20;14(2):e0211489. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211489. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

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.

Publication types

  • Meta-Analysis
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • Systematic Review

MeSH terms

  • Humans
  • Lens Implantation, Intraocular / adverse effects*
  • Lenses, Intraocular / adverse effects*
  • Observational Studies as Topic
  • Postoperative Complications / surgery*
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Visual Acuity

Grants and funding

This study was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81670869). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.