Long-term functional outcome between Yamane technique and retropupillary iris-claw technique in a large study cohort

Purpose:To evaluate which secondary intraocular lens (IOL) implantation technique was more successful in achieving the best postoperative results and refractive outcomes between retropupillary iris-claw IOL (ICIOL) and flanged intrascleral IOL (FIIOL) fixation with the Yamane technique.Setting:Eye Clinic of the University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy.Design:Retrospective observational study.Methods:116 eyes of 110 patients who underwent ICIOL or FIIOL were analyzed. Patients with follow-up shorter than 6 months or with incomplete clinical data were excluded. Collected data included demographics, ocular comorbidity, indication of surgery, intraocular pressure, early (≤1 month) and late (>1 month) postoperative complications, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and manifest refraction at the last follow-up visit.Results:50% (n = 58) of eyes underwent FIIOL and 50% (n = 58) ICIOL implantation for aphakia (n = 44, 38%) and IOL dislocation (n = 72, 62%). No statistically significant differences in demographics, comorbidity, follow-up duration, postoperative complications, and surgical indications were found. The refractive prediction error (RPE) was 0.69 ± 0.94 diopter (D) in the FIIOL group and 0.21 ± 0.75 D in the ICIOL group (P =.03), indicating residual hyperopia after both techniques. RPE, mean absolute error, and median absolute error were higher in the FIIOL group (P =.003). ICIOL implantation was more successful in obtaining a RPE between -0.50 D and +0.50 D (52% of ICIOL, n = 30, and 31% of FIIOL, n = 18).Conclusions:Both techniques were effective in increasing preoperative CDVA with no statistical difference between them. Although complication rates did not significantly differ, the FIIOL group exhibited less predictable refractive outcomes. Adjusting the dioptric power of the 3-piece IOL, as performed in ciliary sulcus implantation, to prevent myopic shift, is not recommended.