title: Comparison of capsular opacification and refractive status after placement of three different intraocular lens implants following phacoemulsification and aspiration of cataracts in dogs.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate the effect of lens design and biomaterial on formation of posterior capsular opacification (PCO) and refractive correction. Animals studied Sixty dogs undergoing bilateral phacoemulsification for mature or diabetic cataracts.
  
  
  METHODS
  One randomly selected eye received a rounded edge 41D polymethyl-methacrylate (PMMA) intraocular replacement lens (IOL) and the contralateral eye received either a squared edge 41D hydrophilic acrylic IOL (n = 35) or a squared edge 40D hydrophobic acrylic IOL (n = 25). At the (mean = 79 day) reexamination period, PCO was graded using direct slit-lamp observation and by masked observer evaluation of digital images of the IOLs. Streak retinoscopy and B-mode ultrasound were performed at this period.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The PCO score via direct slit-lamp was significantly lower for the hydrophilic acrylic IOL when compared to the PMMA IOL. Masked observer evaluation of digital images revealed that the acrylic IOLs had lower but generally not statistically significant PCO scores than the PMMA IOLs. Streak retinoscopy showed that the PMMA IOL was significantly closer to emmetropia (+0.44 D) when compared to either the hydrophilic acrylic (+0.96 D) or the hydrophobic acrylic (+1.2 D) IOLs. B-mode ultrasonography revealed the center of the hydrophilic acrylic IOL is 0.31 mm closer to the retina and the center of the hydrophobic acrylic IOL is 0.63 mm further from the retina when compared to the center of the PMMA to retina distance.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Square edged foldable acrylic IOLs show a predisposition towards generating slightly less PCO than round edged PMMA IOLs in the early postoperative period, however, both acrylic IOLs had greater persistent hyperopia than the PMMA IOLs.
authors.affiliation: Animal Eye Care Associates, Cary, North Carolina, USA.
authors.forename: Barrett W
authors.initials: BW
authors.lastname: Gift
authors.forename: Robert V
authors.initials: RV
authors.lastname: English
authors.forename: Brad
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Nadelstein
authors.forename: Anne K
authors.initials: AK
authors.lastname: Weigt
authors.forename: Brian C
authors.initials: BC
authors.lastname: Gilger
mesh_terms: D000180:Acrylic Resins; D000818:Animals; D002386:Cataract / Q000662:veterinary*; D002387:Cataract Extraction / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods / Q000662:veterinary*; D004283:Dog Diseases / Q000601:surgery*; D004285:Dogs; D005260:Female; D019654:Lens Implantation, Intraocular / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods / Q000662:veterinary*; D008297:Male; D018918:Phacoemulsification / Q000662:veterinary*; D019904:Polymethyl Methacrylate; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D011897:Random Allocation; D016896:Treatment Outcome
chemical_list: D000180:Acrylic Resins; D019904:Polymethyl Methacrylate