Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

The cost of laser refractive surgery and supplementary sulcus lens implantation for pseudophakic ametropia and astigmatism, the leeds experience

Eye volume 37, pages 2169–2171 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Refractive surprise occurs when an unintended refractive outcome is achieved. NHS cataract surgery aims to give good, best corrected visual acuity. The refractive target is normally emmetropia but may vary due to patient preference.

The NHS benchmark of 85% of patients achieving a spherical equivalent (SE) 1.00D within target acknowledges 3 in 20 eyes experience refractive surprise [1]. Refractive surprise following NHS cataract surgery is commonly managed conservatively with glasses or contact lenses. Intraocular lens (IOL) rotation may be used to address residual astigmatism with toric implants in the early postoperative period. When intolerable anisometropia, or ocular dominance change occurs patients may require surgical intervention.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Jaycock P, Johnston RL, Taylor H, Adams M, Tole DM, Galloway P. UK EPR user group et al. The Cataract National Dataset electronic multi-centre audit of 55,567 operations: updating benchmark standards of care in the United Kingdom and internationally. Eye. 2009;23:38–49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Knox Cartwright NE, Johnston RL, Jaycock PD, Tole DM, Sparrow JM. The Cataract National Dataset electronic multicentre audit of 55,567 operations: when should IOLMaster biometric measurements be rechecked? Eye. 2010;24:894–900.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fernández-Buenaga R, Alió JL, Pérez Ardoy AL, Larrosa Quesada A, Pinilla Cortés L, Barraquer RI. Resolving refractive error after cataract surgery: IOL exchange, piggyback lens, or LASIK. J Refract Surg. 2013;29:676–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Barakova D, Jordanovova D, Sramka M, Kaluzakova A, Sajdikova M. The incidence and results of laser enhancement after cataract and refractive surgery with trifocal lens implantation. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub. 2022;166:222–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Piñero DR, Ayala Espinosa MJ, Alió JL. LASIK outcomes following multifocal and monofocal intraocular lens implantation. J Refract Surg. 2010;26:569–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Semiz F, Lokaj AS, Musa NH, Semiz CE, Demirsoy ZA, Semiz O. SMILE for the treatment of residual refractive error after cataract surgery. Ophthalmol Ther. 2022;11:1539–50.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. McLintock CA, McKelvie J, Gatzioufas Z, Wilson JJ, Stephenson DC, Apel AJG. Outcomes of toric supplementary intraocular lenses for residual astigmatic refractive error in pseudophakic eyes. Int Ophthalmol. 2019;39:1965–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McLintock CA, McKelvie J, Niyazmand H, Apel AJG. Outcomes of a toric monofocal piggyback intraocular lens for residual astigmatic refractive error in pseudophakic eyes. Curr Eye Res. 2022;47:443–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Alfonso JF, Lisa C, Alfonso-Bartolozzi B, Fernández-Vega-Cueto L, Montés-Micó R. Implantable Collamer Lens® for management of pseudophakic ametropia in eyes with a spectrum of previous corneal surgery. J Refract Surg. 2018;34:654–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Leeds Teaching Hospitals, Leeds, UK

    Arthur Okonkwo, Robert Blizzard, Seema Anand, Andrew Morrell, Ahmed Shalaby Bardan & David Dunleavy

  2. York and Scarborough NHS Trust, York, UK

    Robert Blizzard

  3. Leeds University, Leeds, UK

    Ahmed Shalaby Bardan

  4. Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt

    Ahmed Shalaby Bardan

Authors
  1. Arthur Okonkwo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert Blizzard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Seema Anand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andrew Morrell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ahmed Shalaby Bardan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. David Dunleavy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AO, RB, SA, AM, ASB, and DD. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AO, RB, SA, AM, ASB, and DD. Final approval of the version to be published; AO, RB, SA, AM, ASB, and DD. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved; AO, RB, SA, AM, ASB, and DD.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arthur Okonkwo.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Okonkwo, A., Blizzard, R., Anand, S. et al. The cost of laser refractive surgery and supplementary sulcus lens implantation for pseudophakic ametropia and astigmatism, the leeds experience. Eye 37, 2169–2171 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-022-02351-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-022-02351-5

Search

Advanced search

Quick links