A Randomised intra-patient Comparision of toric Intraocular lenses

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    A Randomised Intra-patient Comparision of Closed Loop and Plate Haptic Toric, Aspheric Aberration Neutral Hydrophilic Acrylic Intraouclar Lenses in Patients with Bilateral Astigmatism

  • IRAS ID

    168791

  • Contact name

    Phillip Buckhurst

  • Contact email

    phillip.buckhurst@plymouth.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    Plymouth University

  • Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier

    NCT02264457

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    2 years, 0 months, 1 days

  • Research summary

    Cataracts are the most common cause of low vision and blindness in the world and cataract surgery is the single most commonly performed surgery in the world today. Cataract surgery is also known as phacoemulsification and involves the extraction of the natural lens from its capsular bag and implantation of an artificial intraocular lens (IOL). At the time of surgery around 19-22% of the total population has over 1.50DC of corneal astigmatism. It has been found that as little as 1.00DC astigmatism reduces unaided vision for most tasks Uncorrected astigmatism reduces visual acuity and increases spectacle dependence; this can reduce quality of life[7] and increase overall economic costs.[8]
    Toric IOLs promise a stable correction of astigmatism for cataract patients as long as the IOL is correctly positioned and does not rotate.
    To date no study has examined the rotational stability of either the Rayner T-flex Aspheric Toric IOL or the AT TORBI aspheric IOL using objective image analysis compensating for eye torsion.
    The purpose of this study is to examine and compare the rotational stability, visual function and prevalence of post operative complications following contra-lateral implantation of the Rayner T-flex Aspheric Toric IOL and the Zeiss AT TORBI toric IOL.

  • REC name

    South West - Cornwall & Plymouth Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    15/SW/0025

  • Date of REC Opinion

    27 Mar 2015

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion