Scholarlink

Rationale <p>Sulcus implantation of intraocular lenses (IOLs) is an essential strategy when capsular support is inadequate or postoperative refractive correction is required. Evidence on safety, design considerations, and clinical outcomes is extensive but heterogeneous.</p> Objectives <p>To synthesise current evidence on indications, visual outcomes, and complication profiles of sulcus-implanted IOLs, and to highlight design-dependent factors influencing predictability and safety.</p> Methods <p>A narrative review was conducted using PubMed and manual reference screening. Studies reporting clinical outcomes of sulcus-positioned IOLs—including three-piece lenses, supplementary/add-on lenses, and sulcus-placed primary IOLs—were included. Numerical values are presented as reported, without standardised pooling or comparative analysis.</p> Results <p>Fifty studies met the inclusion criteria. Across indications such as aphakia, zonular weakness, IOL dislocation, capsular rupture, and refractive enhancement, postoperative visual acuity was generally stable, with mean improvements commonly ranging from 0.10 to 0.30 logMAR in appropriately selected cases. Complications varied substantially by IOL design. Three-piece lenses showed low rates of cystoid macular oedema (1–8%), pigment dispersion (0–12%), and intraocular pressure elevation (1–9%). In contrast, single-piece acrylic lenses demonstrated consistently higher risk of uveal chafing, pigment dispersion, intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation, and uveitis-glaucoma-hyphaema (UGH) syndrome. Purpose-designed sulcus and add-on lenses demonstrated good centration, low decentration or tilt, and predictable reversibility. Endothelial safety was generally comparable to standard cataract surgery when sulcus-appropriate designs were used.</p> Conclusions <p>Sulcus implantation is a versatile and reliable option when the capsular bag is compromised or supplementary correction is required. Outcomes and safety are strongly design-dependent, with three-piece and sulcus-specific add-on lenses showing the most favourable profiles. Further prospective studies are needed to refine long-term risk assessment and design-based recommendations.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Advances and Challenges in Sulcus-Implanted Intraocular Lenses: A Comprehensive Narrative Review

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月27日

查看全文
  • Mario R. Romano,
  • Alfonso Savastano,
  • David Keegan,
  • Mario Damiano Toro,
  • Faustino Vidal-Aroca,
  • Sandro Di Simplicio,
  • Boris Stanzel,
  • Giuseppe Fasolino,
  • Francisco Cabrera,
  • Stanislao Rizzo

摘要

Rationale

Sulcus implantation of intraocular lenses (IOLs) is an essential strategy when capsular support is inadequate or postoperative refractive correction is required. Evidence on safety, design considerations, and clinical outcomes is extensive but heterogeneous.

Objectives

To synthesise current evidence on indications, visual outcomes, and complication profiles of sulcus-implanted IOLs, and to highlight design-dependent factors influencing predictability and safety.

Methods

A narrative review was conducted using PubMed and manual reference screening. Studies reporting clinical outcomes of sulcus-positioned IOLs—including three-piece lenses, supplementary/add-on lenses, and sulcus-placed primary IOLs—were included. Numerical values are presented as reported, without standardised pooling or comparative analysis.

Results

Fifty studies met the inclusion criteria. Across indications such as aphakia, zonular weakness, IOL dislocation, capsular rupture, and refractive enhancement, postoperative visual acuity was generally stable, with mean improvements commonly ranging from 0.10 to 0.30 logMAR in appropriately selected cases. Complications varied substantially by IOL design. Three-piece lenses showed low rates of cystoid macular oedema (1–8%), pigment dispersion (0–12%), and intraocular pressure elevation (1–9%). In contrast, single-piece acrylic lenses demonstrated consistently higher risk of uveal chafing, pigment dispersion, intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation, and uveitis-glaucoma-hyphaema (UGH) syndrome. Purpose-designed sulcus and add-on lenses demonstrated good centration, low decentration or tilt, and predictable reversibility. Endothelial safety was generally comparable to standard cataract surgery when sulcus-appropriate designs were used.

Conclusions

Sulcus implantation is a versatile and reliable option when the capsular bag is compromised or supplementary correction is required. Outcomes and safety are strongly design-dependent, with three-piece and sulcus-specific add-on lenses showing the most favourable profiles. Further prospective studies are needed to refine long-term risk assessment and design-based recommendations.