International Ophthalmology

, Volume 39, Issue 4, pp 839–845 | Cite as

A comparative study of transscleral suture-fixated and scleral-fixated intraocular lens implantation

  • Yu MizunoEmail author
  • Yosuke Sugimoto
Original Paper



To compare short-term clinical outcomes between scleral-fixated and transscleral suture-fixated intraocular lens (IOL) implantation.


Hiroshima Prefectural Hospital, Japan.


A retrospective, nonrandomized, comparative case series.


Eighty-nine eyes of 87 patients were included in this study; 45 eyes underwent transscleral suture-fixated IOL implantation (group 1), and 44 eyes underwent scleral-fixated IOL implantation (group 2) between February 2009 and June 2017 in the department of Ophthalmology, Hiroshima Prefectural Hospital, Japan. The postoperative best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), degree of astigmatism, IOL astigmatism (total astigmatism–corneal astigmatism), and refractive error were all measured at 1-week and 1-month intervals.


The mean preoperative BCVA in logarithm of minimum angle of resolution (log MAR) was 0.39 ± 0.56 and 0.46 ± 0.51 in groups 1 and 2, respectively, and the mean postoperative BCVA was 0.25 ± 0.41 and 0.34 ± 0.49 at 1 month. The postoperative degree of astigmatism in group 2 was significantly less than that in group 1 at 1 week and 1 month (p = 0.0046 and p = 0.021, respectively). The postoperative IOL astigmatism in group 2 was significantly less than that in group 1 at 1 week (p = 0.021), while the refractive error between the two groups was not significantly different at 1 week or 1 month.


Scleral-fixated IOL implantation has equivalent BCVA and refractive error outcomes as transscleral suture-fixated IOL implantation during the early postoperative period without serious complications. Scleral-fixated IOL implantation appears to provide more stable fixation than suture-fixated IOL implantation.


Secondary IOL implantation Transscleral suture-fixated IOL implantation Scleral-fixated IOL implantation Double-needle technique 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declared that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Vote BJ, Tranos P, Bunce C, Charteris DG, Da Cruz L (2006) Long-term outcome of posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation. Am J Ophthalmol 141:308–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Luk AS, Young AL, Cheng LL (2013) Long-term outcome of scleral-fixated intraocular lens implantation. Br J Ophthalmol 97:1308–1311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Malbran ES, Malbran E Jr, Negri I (1986) Lens guide suture for transport and fixation in secondary IOL implantation after intracapsular extraction. Int Ophthalmol 9:151–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Por YM, Lavin MJ (2005) Techniques of intraocular lens suspension in the absence of capsular/zonular support. Surv Ophthalmol 50:429–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Evereklioglu C, Er H, Bekir NA, Borazan M, Zorlu F (2003) Comparison of secondary implantation of flexible open-loop anterior chamber and scleral-fixated posterior chamber intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 29:301–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hannush SB (2000) Sutured posterior chamber intraocular lenses: indications and procedure. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 11:233–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wagoner MD, Cox TA, Ariyasu RG, Jacobs DS, Karp CL (2003) Intraocular lens implantation in the absence of capsular support. Ophthalmology 110:840–859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Buckley EG (2007) Hanging by a thread: the long-term efficacy and safety of transscleral sutured intraocular lenses in children. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 105:294–311Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Price MO, Price FW Jr, Werner L, Berlie C, Mamalis N (2005) Late dislocation of scleral-sutured posterior chamber intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 31:1320–1326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Parekh P, Green WR, Stark WJ, Akpek EK (2007) Subluxation of suture-fixated posterior chamber intraocular lenses a clinicopathologic study. Ophthalmology 114:232–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Heilskov T, Joondeph BC, Olsen KR, Blankenship GW (1989) Late endophthalmitis after transscleral fixation of a posterior chamber intraocular lens. Arch Ophthalmol 107:1427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gabor SG, Pavlidis MM (2007) Sutureless intrascleral posterior chamber intraocular lens fixation. J Cataract Refract Surg 33:1851–1854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Agarwal A, Kumar DA, Jacob S, Baid C, Srinivasan S (2008) Fibrin glue-assisted sutureless posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation in eyes with deficient posterior capsules. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:1433–1438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yamane S, Inoue M, Arakawa A, Kadonosono K (2014) Sutureless 27-gauge needle-guided intrascleral intraocular lens implantation with lamellar scleral dissection. Ophthalmology 121:61–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ganekal S, Venkataratnam S, Dorairaj S, Jhanji V (2012) Comparative evaluation of suture-assisted and fibrin glue-assisted scleral fixated intraocular lens implantation. J Refract Surg 28:249–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Koch DD, Jenkins RB, Weikert MP, Yeu E, Wang L (2013) Correcting astigmatism with toric intraocular lenses: effect of posterior corneal astigmatism. J Cataract Refract Surg 39:1803–1809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mojzis P, Piñero DP, Ctvrteckova V, Rydlova I (2013) Analysis of internal astigmatism and higher order aberrations in eyes implanted with a new diffractive multifocal toric intraocular lens. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 251:341–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McAllister AS, Hirst LW (2011) Visual outcomes and complications of scleral-fixated posterior chamber intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 37:1263–1269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Uthoff D, Teichmann KD (1998) Secondary implantation of scleral-fixated intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 24:945–950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Verma L, Gogoi M, Tewari HK, Kumar A, Talwar D (2001) Comparative study of vitrectomy for dropped nucleus with and without the use of perfluorocarbon liquid. Clinical, electrophysiological and vsual field outcomes. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 79:354–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sinha R, Bansal M, Sharma N, Dada T, Tandon R, Titiyal JS (2016) Transscleral suture-fixated versus intrascleral haptic-fixated intraocular lens: a comparative study. Eye and Contact Lens 0:1–5Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nadal J, Kudsieh B, Casaroli-Marano RP (2015) Scleral fixation of posteriorly dislocated intraocular lenses by 23-gauge vitrectomy without anterior segment approach. J Ophthalmol. Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Buckley EG (2007) Hanging by a thread: the long-term efficacy and safety of transscleral sutured intraocular lenses in children (an American Ophthalmological Society thesis). Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 105:294–311Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of OphthalmologyHiroshima Prefectural HospitalHiroshimaJapan

Personalised recommendations