J Korean Ophthalmol Soc.  2012 Dec;53(12):1772-1776. 10.3341/jkos.2012.53.12.1772.

Clinical Results of Cataract Operation in a Monocular Person

• Park JH
• Lee JS

• KMID: 2216389
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2012.53.12.1772

Abstract

PURPOSE
To investigate complication rates and results of cataract surgery in a monocular patient compared to normal binocular cataract patients.
METHODS
We retrospectively analyzed 84 eyes of 84 patients that had undergone phacoemulsification, intraocular lens implantation and were followed up for 6 months or more. The fellow eye condition was classified into two different groups: Group A (experimental group) and Group B (control group). The best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) before and after surgery, operation time, nucleus sclerosis, and complication rate between the two groups were compared.
RESULTS
Both groups showed a significant level of visual improvement after 6 months (p < 0.01, 0.01). There was no significant difference in sex, age, preoperative lens opacity, pre- and postoperative visual acuity, spherical equivalent, astigmatism, and rate of complications (posterior capsule rupture [n = 1], uveitis [n = 1] vs. posterior capsule rupture [n = 3], intraocular lens capture [n = 1].
CONCLUSIONS
The present study showed no difference in surgical results between Groups A and B. The results demonstrated that cataract surgery in a monocular patient resulted in favorable visual improvement.

Keyword

Blindness; Cataract; Last eye; Monocular person

MeSH Terms

Astigmatism
Blindness
Cataract
Eye
Humans
Lens Implantation, Intraocular
Lenses, Intraocular
Phacoemulsification
Retrospective Studies
Rupture
Sclerosis
Telescopes
Uveitis
Visual Acuity

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Change of visual acuity after operation. Vac = visual acuity, Preop = preoperative, Postop = postoperative, log MAR = logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution.

Reference

1. Brian G, Taylor H. Cataract blindness--challenges for the 21st century. Bull World Health Organ. 2001. 79:249–256.

2. Grabow HB. Topical anesthesia for cataract surgery. Eur J Implant Refract Surg. 1993. 5:20–24.

3. Gimbel HV, Neuhann T. Development, advantages, and methods of the continuous circular capsulorhexis technique. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1990. 16:31–37.

4. Dogru M, Honda R, Omoto M, et al. Early visual results with the rollable ThinOptX intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004. 30:558–565.

5. Pandey SK, Werner L, Agarwal A, et al. Phakonit. cataract removal through a sub-1.0 mm incision and implantation of the ThinOptX rollable intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002. 28:1710–1713.

6. Alió J, Rodríguez-Prats JL, Galal A, Ramzy M. Outcomes of microincision cataract surgery versus coaxial phacoemulsification. Ophthalmology. 2005. 112:1997–2003.

7. Pingree MF, Crandall AS, Olson RJ. Cataract surgery complications in 1 year at an academic institution. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1999. 25:705–708.

8. Kim KH, Oh TS, Jang SD. Clinical aspects of 273 patients with visual disability. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2002. 43:136–142.

9. Ciulla TA, Starr MB, Masket S. Bacterial endophthalmitis prophylaxis for cataract surgery: an evidence-based update. Ophthalmology. 2002. 109:13–24.

10. Ou JI, Ta CN. Endophthalmitis prophylaxis. Ophthalmol Clin North Am. 2006. 19:449–456.

11. Wong TY, Chee SP. The epidemiology of acute endophthalmitis after cataract surgery in an Asian population. Ophthalmology. 2004. 111:699–705.

12. Lalitha P, Rajagopalan J, Prakash K, et al. Postcataract endophthalmitis in South India incidence and outcome. Ophthalmology. 2005. 112:1884–1889.

13. Choi GJ, Yoon GJ, Na KS. Clinical Observation on Postoperative Endophthalmitis Following Cataract Surgery. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 1996. 37:961–966.

14. Lee SB, Han JW, Chung SK, Baek NH. Factors associated with visual outcomes of postoperative endophthalmitis following cataract surgery. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2005. 46:1618–1623.

15. Mamalis N, Edelhauser HF, Dawson DG, et al. Toxic anterior segment syndrome. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006. 32:324–333.

16. Wilson FM, Wilson FM II. Duane TD, editor. Postoperative uveitis. Clinical Ophthalmology. 1988. 1988. v. 4:Revised ed. Philadelphia: Harper and Row;2–3.

17. Locatcher-Khorazo D, Gutierrez B. Ocular flora of 1,024 children(1~18 years old), 1,786 young adults(20~35 years old) and 7,461 patient : awaiting ocular surgery, with no known infection(Unpublished data from 1952 to 1968), Microbiology of the eye. 1972. Baltimore: CV Mosby;14–16.

18. Choi S, Shin D. Comparison of normal bacterial flora in the conjuntival sac of normal and anophthalmic eyes. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 1991. 32:939–943.

19. Sun DY, Lee JH. The lncidence of Retinal Detachment after Cataract Surgery according to Surgical Methods. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 1995. 36:2157–2161.

20. Lois N, Wong D. Pseudophakic retinal detachment. Surv Ophthalmol. 2003. 48:467–487.

21. Boberg-Ans G, Villumsen J, Henning V. Retinal detachment after phacoemulsification cataract extraction. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003. 29:1333–1338.

22. Wilkinson CP, Anderson LS, Little JH. Retinal detachment following phacoemulsification. Ophthalmology. 1978. 85:151–156.

23. Smith PW, Stark WJ, Maumenee AE. Retinal detachment after extracapsular cataract extraction with posterior chamber intraocular lens. Ophthalmology. 1987. 94:495–504.