Ultra-Short-Term Refractive Outcomes After Yamane Technique Scleral-Fixated Intraocular Lens Implantation: A Comparison of Anterior Vitrectomy and Pars Plana Vitrectomy

Ultra-Short-Term Refractive Outcomes After Yamane Technique Scleral-Fixated Intraocular Lens Implantation: A Comparison of Anterior Vitrectomy and Pars Plana Vitrectomy | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Ultra-Short-Term Refractive Outcomes After Yamane Technique Scleral-Fixated Intraocular Lens Implantation: A Comparison of Anterior Vitrectomy and Pars Plana Vitrectomy Timothy Khai Wing Liew, Choon Han Goh, Tajunisah Begam Mohd Iqbal, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8687927/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 06 Apr, 2026 Read the published version in International Ophthalmology → Version 1 posted 10 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background The Yamane technique for sutureless scleral-fixated intraocular lens (YTSFIOL) implantation is an established option for visual rehabilitation in eyes without capsular support. However, evidence on ultra-short-term refractive outcomes and the influence of different vitreous management strategies remains limited. Methods This retrospective observational cohort study included consecutive adult patients who underwent YTSFIOL implantation by a single surgeon at a tertiary centre. Ultra-short-term outcomes were defined as visual and refractive outcomes assessed at six weeks postoperatively. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), spherical equivalence (SE), refractive astigmatism, and corneal astigmatism were analysed and compared between eyes that underwent anterior vitrectomy (AV) and pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). Results Thirty-one eyes of 30 patients were included. Mean BCVA improved significantly from 0.25 ± 0.24 LogMAR preoperatively to 0.14 ± 0.10 LogMAR at six weeks postoperatively (p = 0.041). Mean SE improved from + 4.83 ± 7.39 D to − 0.70 ± 0.90 D (p < 0.001) and did not differ significantly from the targeted SE (p = 0.056). Both refractive and corneal astigmatism increased significantly at six weeks. No statistically significant differences were observed between AV and PPV groups in postoperative BCVA, SE, refractive astigmatism, corneal astigmatism, or SE prediction error (all p > 0.05). Early postoperative complication rates were comparable between groups (p = 0.335). Conclusion YTSFIOL implantation provides significant improvement in visual acuity and predictable refractive outcomes as early as six weeks postoperatively, irrespective of vitreous management strategy. Yamane technique scleral-fixated intraocular lens refractive outcomes anterior vitrectomy pars plana vitrectomy Figures Figure 1 INTRODUCTION Aphakia in the absence of adequate capsular support may occur following complicated cataract surgery, lens subluxation or dislocation, or intraocular lens (IOL) explantation. Available options for optical rehabilitation include anterior chamber intraocular lenses (ACIOLs), iris-fixated posterior chamber IOLs, and scleral-fixated intraocular lenses (SFIOLs).¹² Each technique carries inherent advantages and limitations related to long-term stability, corneal endothelial health, and refractive predictability. The sutureless flanged intrascleral fixation technique described by Yamane et al. has gained widespread acceptance due to reduced surgical time, avoidance of suture-related complications, and favourable visual and refractive outcomes.³ Most published studies evaluating YTSFIOL implantation report refractive outcomes at three months or later.³ , ⁹ However, evidence from scleral wound healing studies suggests that small-gauge scleral incisions may heal rapidly, potentially allowing stable refractive outcomes at an earlier postoperative stage.¹⁴ , ¹⁵ Vitrectomy may be performed either as anterior vitrectomy (AV) or pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) in conjunction with YTSFIOL implantation. PPV reduces vitreoretinal traction, inflammatory debris, and posterior segment complications.⁶ However, limited data exist regarding the influence of different vitreous management strategies on early refractive outcomes following YTSFIOL implantation.¹³ , ¹⁶ In this study, ultra-short-term outcomes were defined as refractive and visual outcomes assessed at six weeks postoperatively. The primary aim was to evaluate ultra-short-term refractive outcomes following YTSFIOL implantation. The secondary aim was to compare outcomes between eyes undergoing AV and PPV. METHODS Study Design and Ethics Approval This single-centre retrospective observational cohort study included all consecutive adult patients who underwent YTSFIOL implantation by a single experienced surgeon between 1 September 2020 and 30 September 2023. All surgeries were performed by a single surgeon to minimise inter-operator variability. The study adhered to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice guidelines. Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional research ethics committee. Due to the retrospective nature of the study, the requirement for informed consent was waived. Participants Inclusion criteria were patients aged ≥ 18 years who underwent YTSFIOL implantation using optical biometry obtained with the IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec). Exclusion criteria included pre-existing ocular pathology associated with poor visual potential, biometry obtained using non-optical methods, and failure to attend the six-week postoperative refractive assessment. Data Collection Preoperative data included demographic characteristics, ocular and systemic comorbidities, indication for surgery, BCVA, subjective refraction, refractive astigmatism, corneal astigmatism, axial length, and targeted SE calculated using the SRK/T II formula. Intraoperative data included surgical indication, vitreous management strategy, IOL power, IOL model, and intraoperative complications. The implanted intraocular lenses included CT Lucia 202 (Carl Zeiss Meditec), Sensar AR40e (Abbott Medical Optics), and Eyecryl Plus TP600 (Rayner Biotech). Postoperative data included BCVA, subjective refraction, refractive astigmatism, corneal astigmatism, and early postoperative complications. Surgical Technique All procedures followed the flanged sutureless scleral-fixated IOL technique described by Yamane et al., with minor modifications.³ Twenty-seven-gauge needles were used instead of 30-gauge thin-walled needles, and sequential haptic externalisation was performed prior to thermocauterisation. Angled scleral tunnels were created 2.0 mm posterior to the limbus at the 2 and 8 o’clock positions. The leading and trailing haptics were externalised sequentially, cauterised to form flanges, and repositioned into the scleral tunnels. A 3.0-mm sclero-corneal incision was closed using 10 − 0 nylon sutures. Refractive and corneal astigmatism measurements were obtained at six weeks postoperatively prior to sclero-corneal suture removal. Vitreous Management Groups Eyes were categorised into two groups: Anterior vitrectomy (AV) group : Eyes undergoing AV without prior PPV. Pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) group : Eyes undergoing PPV either as a combined procedure or as a prior staged surgery before YTSFIOL implantation. Statistical Analysis Snellen visual acuities were converted to LogMAR units. Refractive data were converted to spherical equivalence. Paired t-tests were used for pre- and postoperative comparisons. Independent t-tests or Welch t-tests were used for between-group comparisons. Categorical variables were analysed using Chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS Baseline Characteristics Of 44 eyes identified, 31 eyes of 30 patients met the inclusion criteria. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics are summarised in Table 1 . There were no significant differences between AV and PPV groups in age, axial length, targeted SE, or stage of surgery (Table 3 ). Table 1 Baseline demographics & clinical characteristics Characteristics n (%) Mean (SD) Range Number of eyes 31 Number of patients 30 Age (years) 60.6 ± 13.9 25, 82 Gender Male (eyes) 22 (71.0) Female (eyes) 9 (29.0) Race Malay 23 (74.2) Chinese 7 (22.6) Indian 1 (3.2) Underlying disease Type II Diabetes mellitus 11 (35.5) Hypertension 12 (38.7) Marfan 2 (6.5) Glaucoma 6 (19.4) Surgical indication Dislocated PCIOL 11 (35.5) Aphakia 10 (32.3) Subluxated Lens 4 (12.9) Subluxated IOL 3 (9.7) Dislocated Lens 3 (9.7) Types of vitreous management Anterior vitrectomy group 16 (51.6) Pars plana vitrectomy group 15 (48.4) Stage of procedure Primary implantation 21 (67.7) Secondary implantation 10 (32.3) IOLs used CT Lucia 202 18 (58.1) Eyecryl Plus TP600 7 (22.6) Sensar AR40e 6 (19.4) Axial Length (mm) 23.55 ± 1.35 21.62, 27.03 Preoperative BCVA (LogMAR) 0.25 ± 0.24 0.00, 0.78 Preoperative SE (D) 4.83 ± 7.39 -13.50, 13.38 Targeted SE (D) -0.31 ± 0.18 -0.67, 0.10 Preoperative refractive astigmatism (D) -1.06 ± 1.36 -5.50, 0.00 Implanted IOL power (D) 20.15 ± 3.85 11.0, 27.5 Follow up duration (days) 43.45 ± 11.26 27.0, 71.0 Overall Visual and Refractive Outcomes At six weeks postoperatively, mean BCVA improved significantly from 0.25 ± 0.24 to 0.14 ± 0.10 LogMAR (p = 0.041). Mean SE improved from + 4.83 ± 7.39 D to − 0.70 ± 0.90 D (p < 0.001). Both refractive astigmatism and corneal astigmatism increased significantly at six weeks (Table 2 ). Table 2 Visual outcomes before and after operation Variables Mean values Statistical test values p values Preoperative Postoperative Best corrected visual acuity (LogMAR) 0.25 ± 0.24 0.14 ± 0.10 t = 2.14 0.041 1 Spherical equivalence (D) 4.83 ± 7.39 -0.70 ± 0.90 t = 3.90 < 0.001 1 Refractive Astigmatism (D) -1.06 ± 1.36 -2.18 ± 1.45 t = 3.22 0.003 1 Corneal Astigmatism (D) -1.63 ± 1.47 -2.46 ± 1.79 t = 2.99 0.006 1 1 Paired t test Table 3 Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics in between anterior vitrectomy (AV) & pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) groups Variables AV (n = 16) PPV (n = 15) Statistical test values p values Baseline Characteristic Age (years) 58 ± 18 64 ± 8 t = -1.16 0.259 1 Axial length (mm) 23.44 ± 1.22 23.67 ± 1.50 t = -0.47 0.641 2 Targeted spherical equivalence (D) -0.36 ± 0.12 -0.25 ± 0.21 t = -1.80 0.085 1 Stage of surgery Primary 9 (56.3%) 12 (80%) 0.252 3 Secondary 7 (43.7%) 3 (20%) Types of primary YTSFIOL as anterior segment surgery (n = 9) Lens aspiration (n, %) 3 (33.3%) IOL explantation (n, %) 3 (33.3%) Phacoemulsification (n, %) 1 (11.1%) ECCE (n, %) 1 (11.1%) ICCE (n, %) 1 (11.1%) Types of primary YTSFIOL as posterior segment surgery (n = 12) IOL explantation (n, %) 4 (33.3%) Phacofragmentation (n, %) 8 (66.7%) 1 Welch t test 2 Independent student t test 3 Fisher’s exact test Comparison Between AV and PPV Groups No statistically significant differences were observed between AV and PPV groups in postoperative BCVA, SE, refractive astigmatism, corneal astigmatism, or SE prediction error (Table 4 ). Table 4 Visual outcomes in between anterior vitrectomy (AV) and pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) Variables Anterior Vitrectomy Group (n = 16) Pars Plana Vitrectomy Group (n = 15) Statistical test values p values Postoperative best corrected visual acuity (LogMAR) 0.13 ± 0.08 0.16 ± 0.13 t = − 0.68 0.504 1 Postoperative spherical equivalence (D) -0.61 ± 1.14 -0.80 ± 0.57 t = 0.58 0.565 1 Postoperative refractive astigmatism (D) -2.56 ± 1.52 -1.77 ± 1.29 t = -1.57 0.128 1 Postoperative corneal astigmatism (D) -2.80 ± 1.96 -2.09 ± 1.58 t = -1.10 0.281 1 Targeted Spherical Equivalence (D) -0.36 ± 0.12 -0.25 ± 0.21 t = -1.80 2 0.085 Postoperative Spherical Equivalence (D) -0.61 ± 1.14 -0.80 ± 0.57 t = 0.58 1 0.565 Spherical Equivalence Prediction Error (D) -0.32 ± 1.12 -0.45 ± 0.55 t = 0.41 1 0.682 1 Independent Student t-test 2 Welch t test Table 5: Summary of journals related to refractive outcomes in YTSFIOL implantation (A) Best-corrected visual acuity in YTSFIOL implantation Author, year Study Design Title Results Duration of follow up Lens for SFIOL (Yamane S, Sato S, et al. 2017) 3 Prospective, non-randomised, interventional case series of 100 eyes from 97 consecutive patients, 25G or 27G secondary PPV, 30G thin wall needles Flanged intrascleral intraocular lens fixation with double-needle technique Mean Preoperative BCVA = 0.25 ± 0.49 At 6 months, Mean Postoperative BCVA = 0.11 ± 0.36 (p<0.01) At 12 months, Mean Postoperative BCVA = 0.09 ± 0.31 (p<0.01) At 24 months, Mean Postoperative BCVA = 0.12 ± 0.34 (p=0.03) At 36 months, Mean Postoperative BCVA = 0.04 ±0.25 (p=0.10) At 6, 12, 24, 36 months Mean = 20.6 ± 10.0 months X-70 (Santen), ZA9003 (Aboott Medical Optics), PN6A (Kowa), or MA60MA (Alcon) (Besozzi G, Chiara Posarelli, et al. 2021) 4 Prospective, interventional, consecutive case series of 12 eyes with complicated phacoemulsification, done 23G PPV, phacofragmentation and 30G thin-walled needle primary YTSFIOL (with Yamane double-needle-stabilizer), single surgeons Standardized flanged intraslecral intraocular lens fixation with the double-needle technique for cataract luxation in the vitreous chamber during phacoemulsification Mean Preoperative BCVA = 1.16 ± 0.30 significantly improved to 0.05 ± 0.06 (Postoperative) (p<0.05) At 6 months PU6AS (Kowa) (Yavuzer K, Evcimen Y et al. 2019) 5 Retrospective review of 21 cases underwent modified Yamane technique with 27G sutureless transconjunctival intrascleral IOL fixation, single needle, single cornea port, 2mm scleral tunnel) Sutureless transconjunctival intrascleral intraocular lens fixation: the modified Yamane technique Mean Preoperative BCVA improved from 0.21 ± 0.88 to Postoperative BCVA of 0.09 ± 0.85 (p = 0.001) At 3 months Eyecryl Plus TP6130 (Biotech Vision Care) (Rishi P, Shelke K, et al. 2021) 6 Retrospective study of 47 eyes of 46 patients underwent YTSFIOL implantation combined with 3-port 30G PPV Surgical outcomes and complications of sutureless needle-guided intrascleral intraocular lens fixation combined with vitrectomy as single-stage procedure Mean Preoperative BCVA improved from 0.79 to Postoperative BCVA of 0.39 (No statistical test done) Means = 4.21 months Sensar AR40e (Abbott Medical Optics) (B) Spherical equivalence & spherical prediction error in YTSFIOL implantation Author, year Study Design Title Results Duration of follow up Lens (Yamane S, Sato S, et al. 2017) 3 Prospective, nonrandomised, interventional case series of 100 eyes from 97 consecutive patients, 25G or 27G Secondary PPV, 30G thin-wall needles Flanged intrascleral intraocular lens fixation with double-needle technique Preop SE = +5.28 ± 6.90 D (Range: -4.88 to 14.25 D) PE = -0.21 ± 0.99 D Mean = 20.6 ± 10.0 months X-70 (Santen) ZA9003 (Aboott Medical Optics) PN6A (Kowa) MA60MA (Alcon) (Besozzi G, Chiara Posarelli, et al. 2021) 4 Prospective, interventional, consecutive case series of 12 eyes after complicated phacoemulsification, done 23G PPV, phacofragmentation & 30G thin-walled needle primary YTSFIOL (with Yamane double neede stabilizer), single surgeons Standardized flanged intraslecral intraocular lens fixation with the double-needle technique for cataract luxation in the vitreous chamber during phacoemulsification Target SE = -0.20 ± -0.09 D (range: -0.08 to -0.37 D) Final SE = -0.44 ± -0.14 D (range: -0.25 to -0.75 D) No significant difference (p = 0.87) At 6 months PU6AS (Kowa) (Rishi P, Shelke K, et al. 2021) 6 Retrospective study of 47 eyes of 46 patients underwent Yamane SFIOL combined with 3-port 23G or 26G PPV Surgical outcomes and complications of sutureless 30G needle-guided intrascleral intraocular lens fixation combined with vitrectomy Preoperative SE = +7.64D ± −7.74D Postoperative SE = -0.47 ± −2.26D (no reported statistical test done) Mean = 4.21 months Sensar AR40e (Abbott Medical Optics) (Lee R, Govindaraju et al. 2021) 7 Retrospective, consecutive cohort, single centre, multiple surgeons, 84 eyes of 80 patients Refractive outcomes after sutureless intrascleral fixation of intraocular lens with pars plana vitrectomy Preoperative SE not documented. At 3 months, Postoperative SE = -0.50 ± 1.59 D and change of SE = 0.58 ± 1.49 D. At 1-year, Postoperative SE = -0.55 ± 1.32 D and change of SE = 0.39 ± 1.42 D There was no difference between SE or change of SE throughout follow-up (p = 0.97 and p = 0.96, respectively). At 3 to 12 months Mean = 2.33 ± 1.36 years. MA60AC (Alcon) or ZA9003 (Abbott Medical Optics) (Veysel Aykut, Fehim Esen, et al. 2021) 8 Mixed cohort design. 14 patients underwent (23G or 25G) trocar-assisted sutureless intrascleral IOL implantation Refractive outcome of trocar-assisted sutureless scleral fixation of 3-piece intraocular lenses Preoperative SE not documented Postoperative, Mean SE = +0.855 D ± 1.15 D Targeted SE = 0.005 ± 0.41D Final SE = +0.855 ± 1.15D (Statistically different from targeted SE, p=0.034) Mean = 16.0 ± 6.5 months MA60AC (Alcon) (Rocke JR, McGuinness MB, et al. 2020) 9 Retrospective consecutive series of 115 YTSFIOL cases, compared with 54 consecutive ACIOL cases (n=54) and 100 routine phacoemulsification with PCIOL cases, multiple surgeon Refractive outcomes of the Yamane flanged intrascleral haptic fixation technique PE = +0.04 ± 0.88D, not statistically different to the “in the bag” group (-0.10 ± 0.53D), p = 0.185 “in the bag” placement had a significantly greater proportion of cases with PE within ±0.50 D (72%), compared to SFIOL (50%, p = 0.001) & ACIOL (34%, p < 0.001) Median absolute error of “in the bag” (0.32D) was significantly less than SFIOL (p = 0.011) and ACIOL (p < 0.001). Mean = 4.7 ± 3.4 months ZA9003 (Abbott Medical Optics) (C) Summary of journals related to astigmatism after YTSFIOL implantation Author, year Study Design Title Results Duration of follow up Lens (Veysel Aykut, Fehim Esen, et al. 2021) 8 Mixed cohort design. 14 patients underwent trocar-assisted sutureless intrascleral IOL implantation Refractive outcome of (23G or 25G) trocar-asssisted sutureless scleral fixation of 3-piece intraocular lenses Corneal astigmatism: There were no significant differences between preoperative (1.09 ± 0.56) and postoperative corneal astigmatism value (1.59 ± 0.84) (p=0.17) There were also no significant differences between postoperative corneal astigmatism and post-operative total astigmatism. Mean = 16.0 ± 6.5 months MA60AC (Alcon) (Kemer Atik B, Altan C, et al. 2020) 10 Prospective study of 94 consecutive patients who underwent scleral-fixated IOL implantation with Z-suture technique, single surgeon The effect of intraocular lens tilt on visual outcomes in scleral-fixated intraocular lens implantation Refractive astigmatism: No significant difference between preoperative (-1.50 ± 1.20 D) and postoperative (-1.79 ± 1.38 D) (p = 0.76) Corneal astigmatism: No significant difference between preoperative (-1.54 ± 1.76D) and postoperative corneal astigmatism (-1.65 ± 1.30D) (p = 0.78) There is no statistical difference of visual acuity, refractive error, cylindrical refractive error, and lenticular astigmatism in between patients with a tilt angle of ≥5° (in horizontal or vertical axis) versus the one with < 5° of tilt. Mean = 13.8 (range: 0-65 months) Acrysof MA60AC (Alcon) (Sül S, Kaderli A, et al. 2021) 11 Retrospective cross-sectional study 22 eyes with sutureless YTSFIOL vs 16 eyes with sutured SFIOL vs 23 with conventional phacoemulsification. IOL tilt and decentration assessed by Scheimpflug images at 6 months after surgery. Same surgeon Comparison of decentration, tilt and lenticular astigmatism of intraocular lens between sutured and sutureless scleral fixation technique Lenticular astigmatism significantly lower in sutureless (1.20 ± 0.53) and control (0.86 ± 0.40) group than sutured group (1.89 ± 0.88) (p = 0.003, and p < 0.001) Angle of tilt at both horizontal & vertical meridians was significantly lower in the sutureless group than sutured group (p=0.008 horizontally, p=0.002 vertically) Sutureless IOL and standard phacoemulsification IOL showed similar results in angle of tilt (p>0.05 Mean 9,93 ± 2.64 months YTSFIOL: AcrySof MA60 (Alcon) Sutured: 9-0 polypropylene sutures, Eyecryl (Biotech healthcare) (Kashyap S, Walia S, et al. 2019) 12 Prospective series, 30 eyes of 20 patients with aphakia, subluxated IOL or crustalline lens. 26G SFIOL. Sclerocorneal (SICS) tunnel opened for IOL insertion. Single surgeon. Novel technique of sutureless glueless scleral fixated intraocular lens Preoperative astigmatism = +0.60 ± 1.04 D Postoperative astigmatism =-0.46 ± 1.28 D Preoperative corneal astigmatism =-0.38 ± 1.61 D Postoperative corneal astigmatism =-0.16 ± 1.20 D Lenticular astigmatism = -0.08 ± 0.87D (range: -1.75 to +2.00D) Mean 3 months Aurolens (Aurolab) (D) Summary of journals related to different vitreous strategies before YTSFIOL implantation Author, year Study Design Title Results Duration of follow up Lens (Katarzyna Nowomiejska, Darius Haszcz, et al. 2021) 13 Retrospective consecutive interventional case series of 30. [14 anterior vitrectomy (AV) vs 16 cases of 23G pars plana vitrectomy (PPV)], 30G needle Double-needle Yamane Technique using flanged haptics in ocular trauma-a retrospective survey of visual outcomes and safety l BCVA significantly improved after both AV and PPV [improvement of BCVA: AV: 1.09 ± 0.96, p=0.06; PPV: 0.59 ± 0.57, p = 0.007]. Silicone oil tamponated in PPV associated with worse visual acuity. Post lensectomy status was associated with poor visual function in anterior vitrectomy group. At 3 months (range 2 to 4 months) MA60AC (Alcon) (Cho BJ, Hyeong Gon Yu. 2014) 16 Retrospective consecutive series study of 83cases underwent 26 gaugle (10-0 polypropylene) needle sutured SFIOL with either pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) or anterior vitrectomy (AV), multiple surgeon Surgical outcomes according to vitreous management after scleral fixation of posterior chamber intraocular lenses Both groups achieved l Similar Preop BCVA AV: 0.767 ± 0.864D, PPV: 0.730 ± 0.698D (p=0.834) l Similar Postop BCVA AV: 0.254 ± 0.629D PPV: 0.233 ± 0.517D (p=0.864) l Similar visual improvement AV: -0.503 ± 0.677D PPV: -0.486 ± 0.644D (p=0.911) l Similar target SE AV: -0.62 ± 0.84D, PPV: -0.36 ± 0.82D (p = 0.163) l Similar Postop SE AV: -1.11 ± 1.21D, PPV: -1.43 ± 1.43D (p = 0.330) Mean = 45.9 ± 34.1 months in AV group Versus Mean 41.1 ± 28.6 months in PPV group Acrysof MA60BM (Alcon) or Ya60BBR (Hoya) Postoperative Complications Six eyes (19.4%) experienced early postoperative complications. The most common complication was transient intraocular pressure elevation. All complications were managed conservatively or with standard medical or surgical interventions and resolved without long-term sequelae. There were no cases of retinal detachment, endophthalmitis, or significant IOL decentration. Complication rates did not differ significantly between AV and PPV groups (p = 0.335). DISCUSSION This study demonstrates that YTSFIOL implantation provides significant improvement in visual acuity and predictable refractive outcomes as early as six weeks postoperatively. To our knowledge, this is among the earliest evaluations of refractive outcomes following YTSFIOL implantation and the first to compare outcomes according to vitreous management strategy at this ultra-short-term time point. The improvements in BCVA and SE observed at six weeks were comparable to outcomes reported at three months or later in previous studies.³ , ⁶ , ⁷ These findings support the hypothesis that rapid healing of small-gauge scleral tunnels may permit early refractive stability following YTSFIOL implantation.¹⁴ , ¹⁵ The absence of significant differences between AV and PPV groups suggests that the choice of vitreous management strategy does not adversely affect early refractive outcomes. This finding is consistent with previous studies evaluating longer-term outcomes using both sutureless and sutured SFIOL techniques.¹³ , ¹⁶ The observed increase in refractive and corneal astigmatism at six weeks is likely attributable to sclero-corneal sutures, as measurements were obtained prior to suture removal. Similar findings have been reported in other scleral fixation studies.⁸ , ¹⁰ , ¹¹ Longer-term follow-up is required to determine the stability of astigmatic outcomes following suture removal. Strengths and Limitations Strengths of this study include the evaluation of ultra-short-term refractive outcomes and elimination of inter-surgeon variability. Limitations include the retrospective design, small sample size, and lack of long-term follow-up. CONCLUSION YTSFIOL implantation results in significant improvement in visual acuity and predictable refractive outcomes as early as six weeks postoperatively, irrespective of vitreous management strategy. These findings support YTSFIOL implantation as an effective option for early visual rehabilitation in aphakic eyes without capsular support. Declarations The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript. COMPETING INTEREST The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. ETHICS APPROVAL This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the Medical Research & Ethics Committee (MREC), Ministry of Health, Malaysia.(16 th August 2023/NMRR ID: 23-01005-QOL (IIR)) CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. CONSENT TO PUBLISH The authors affirm that human research participants provided informed consent for publication of the images in Figure1. References Kumar B, Muni I. Scleral fixation of intraocular lenses. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK570585/ Chan TCY, Lam JK, Jhanji V, Li EYM. Comparison of outcomes of primary anterior chamber versus secondary scleral-fixated intraocular lens implantation in complicated cataract surgeries. Am J Ophthalmol . 2015;159(2):221–226.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2014.10.016 Yamane S, Sato S, Maruyama-Inoue M, Kadonosono K. Flanged intrascleral intraocular lens fixation with double-needle technique. Ophthalmology . 2017;124(8):1136–1142. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.03.036 Besozzi G, Posarelli C, Costa MC, et al. Standardized flanged intrascleral intraocular lens fixation with the double-needle technique for cataract luxation in the vitreous chamber during phacoemulsification. J Ophthalmol . 2021;2021:9998482. doi: 10.1155/2021/9998482 Yavuzer K, Evcimen Y. Sutureless transconjunctival intrascleral intraocular lens fixation: the modified Yamane technique. Arq Bras Oftalmol . 2019;82(5):401–405. doi: 10.5935/0004-2749.20190072 Rishi P, Shelke K, Rishi E. Surgical outcomes and complications of sutureless needle-guided intrascleral intraocular lens fixation combined with vitrectomy. Indian J Ophthalmol . 2021;69(9):2317–2323. doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1636_20 Lee R, Govindaraju V, Farley ND, et al. Refractive outcomes after sutureless intrascleral fixation of intraocular lens with pars plana vitrectomy. Retina . 2021;41(4):822–829. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000002916 Aykut V, Esen F, Sali F, Oguz H. Refractive outcome of trocar-assisted sutureless scleral fixation of 3-piece intraocular lenses. Int Ophthalmol . 2021;41(8):2689–2694. doi: 10.1007/s10792-021-01824-y Rocke JR, McGuinness MB, Atkins WK, et al. Refractive outcomes of the Yamane flanged intrascleral haptic fixation technique. Ophthalmology . 2020;127(10):1429–1431. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.03.032 Atik BK, Altan C, Agca A, et al. The effect of intraocular lens tilt on visual outcomes in scleral-fixated intraocular lens implantation. Int Ophthalmol . 2020;40(3):717–724. doi: 10.1007/s10792-019-01233-2 Sül S, Kaderli A, Karalezli A, Kaya C. Comparison of decentration, tilt and lenticular astigmatism of intraocular lens between sutured and sutureless scleral fixation techniques. J Fr Ophtalmol . 2021;44(8):1174–1179. doi: 10.1016/j.jfo.2020.12.031 Kashyap S, Walia S, Bhaisare V, Rawat P, Kori N. Novel technique of sutureless glueless scleral fixated intraocular lens. Indian J Ophthalmol . 2019;67(1):64–68. doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_447_18 Nowomiejska K, Haszcz D, Onyszkiewicz M, et al. Double-needle Yamane technique using flanged haptics in ocular trauma: a retrospective survey of visual outcomes and safety. J Clin Med . 2021;10(12):2562. doi: 10.3390/jcm10122562 Hikichi T, Yoshida A, Hasegawa T, Ohnishi M, Sato T, Muraoka S. Wound healing of scleral self-sealing incision: a comparison of ultrasound biomicroscopy and histology findings. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol . 1998;236(10):775–778. doi: 10.1007/s004170050157 Sawada T, Kakinoki M, Sawada O, Kawamura H, Ohji M. Closure of sclerotomies after 25- and 23-gauge transconjunctival sutureless pars plana vitrectomy evaluated by optical coherence tomography. Ophthalmic Res . 2010;45(3):122–128. doi: 10.1159/000318875 Cho BJ, Yu HG. Surgical outcomes according to vitreous management after scleral fixation of posterior chamber intraocular lenses. Retina . 2014;34(10):1977–1984. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000000168 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 06 Apr, 2026 Read the published version in International Ophthalmology → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 15 Feb, 2026 Reviews received at journal 15 Feb, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 14 Feb, 2026 Reviews received at journal 01 Feb, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 31 Jan, 2026 Reviewers agreed at journal 29 Jan, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 29 Jan, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 28 Jan, 2026 Submission checks completed at journal 28 Jan, 2026 First submitted to journal 24 Jan, 2026 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8687927","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":583774919,"identity":"44a33cbd-778e-484b-a4a7-e1fbe6f733ba","order_by":0,"name":"Timothy Khai Wing Liew","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Malaya","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Timothy","middleName":"Khai Wing","lastName":"Liew","suffix":""},{"id":583774920,"identity":"3bd6638f-1cd7-420b-8abd-474168dd7da3","order_by":1,"name":"Choon Han Goh","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Malaya","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Choon","middleName":"Han","lastName":"Goh","suffix":""},{"id":583774921,"identity":"a1274eea-9046-418e-868b-b77de9857836","order_by":2,"name":"Tajunisah Begam Mohd Iqbal","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Malaya","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tajunisah","middleName":"Begam Mohd","lastName":"Iqbal","suffix":""},{"id":583774922,"identity":"df8d5173-86a8-4c7d-8f51-5724bca8283f","order_by":3,"name":"Wan Mohd Hafidz Wan Abdul Rahman","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Government of Malaysia","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Wan","middleName":"Mohd Hafidz Wan Abdul","lastName":"Rahman","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-01-24 15:53:14","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8687927/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8687927/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-026-04057-z","type":"published","date":"2026-04-06T15:58:15+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":101787885,"identity":"d206141e-0ff5-42dd-bcdb-68828fbb50e1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-03 15:51:40","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":705972,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSequential surgical steps of Yamane technique scleral-fixated intraocular lens implantation following anterior vitrectomy.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8687927/v1/6cd810ccb68752f3dfedf48d.png"},{"id":106809204,"identity":"893a1e6e-ab90-48c6-b4cd-ded2225a2b74","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-13 16:08:14","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2822262,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8687927/v1/180e71d9-35e8-46d2-8f8d-ddad4b8e3b89.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Ultra-Short-Term Refractive Outcomes After Yamane Technique Scleral-Fixated Intraocular Lens Implantation: A Comparison of Anterior Vitrectomy and Pars Plana Vitrectomy","fulltext":[{"header":"INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003eAphakia in the absence of adequate capsular support may occur following complicated cataract surgery, lens subluxation or dislocation, or intraocular lens (IOL) explantation. Available options for optical rehabilitation include anterior chamber intraocular lenses (ACIOLs), iris-fixated posterior chamber IOLs, and scleral-fixated intraocular lenses (SFIOLs).\u0026sup1;\u0026sup2; Each technique carries inherent advantages and limitations related to long-term stability, corneal endothelial health, and refractive predictability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe sutureless flanged intrascleral fixation technique described by Yamane et al. has gained widespread acceptance due to reduced surgical time, avoidance of suture-related complications, and favourable visual and refractive outcomes.\u0026sup3; Most published studies evaluating YTSFIOL implantation report refractive outcomes at three months or later.\u0026sup3;\u003csup\u003e,\u003c/sup\u003e⁹ However, evidence from scleral wound healing studies suggests that small-gauge scleral incisions may heal rapidly, potentially allowing stable refractive outcomes at an earlier postoperative stage.\u0026sup1;⁴\u003csup\u003e,\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026sup1;⁵\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eVitrectomy may be performed either as anterior vitrectomy (AV) or pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) in conjunction with YTSFIOL implantation. PPV reduces vitreoretinal traction, inflammatory debris, and posterior segment complications.⁶ However, limited data exist regarding the influence of different vitreous management strategies on early refractive outcomes following YTSFIOL implantation.\u0026sup1;\u0026sup3;\u003csup\u003e,\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026sup1;⁶\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this study, ultra-short-term outcomes were defined as refractive and visual outcomes assessed at six weeks postoperatively. The primary aim was to evaluate ultra-short-term refractive outcomes following YTSFIOL implantation. The secondary aim was to compare outcomes between eyes undergoing AV and PPV.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"METHODS","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStudy Design and Ethics Approval\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis single-centre retrospective observational cohort study included all consecutive adult patients who underwent YTSFIOL implantation by a single experienced surgeon between 1 September 2020 and 30 September 2023. All surgeries were performed by a single surgeon to minimise inter-operator variability.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e The study adhered to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice guidelines. Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional research ethics committee. Due to the retrospective nature of the study, the requirement for informed consent was waived.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eParticipants\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInclusion criteria were patients aged\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;18 years who underwent YTSFIOL implantation using optical biometry obtained with the IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec). Exclusion criteria included pre-existing ocular pathology associated with poor visual potential, biometry obtained using non-optical methods, and failure to attend the six-week postoperative refractive assessment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eData Collection\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePreoperative data included demographic characteristics, ocular and systemic comorbidities, indication for surgery, BCVA, subjective refraction, refractive astigmatism, corneal astigmatism, axial length, and targeted SE calculated using the SRK/T II formula.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntraoperative data included surgical indication, vitreous management strategy, IOL power, IOL model, and intraoperative complications. The implanted intraocular lenses included CT Lucia 202 (Carl Zeiss Meditec), Sensar AR40e (Abbott Medical Optics), and Eyecryl Plus TP600 (Rayner Biotech).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePostoperative data included BCVA, subjective refraction, refractive astigmatism, corneal astigmatism, and early postoperative complications.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eSurgical Technique\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll procedures followed the flanged sutureless scleral-fixated IOL technique described by Yamane et al., with minor modifications.\u0026sup3; Twenty-seven-gauge needles were used instead of 30-gauge thin-walled needles, and sequential haptic externalisation was performed prior to thermocauterisation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAngled scleral tunnels were created 2.0 mm posterior to the limbus at the 2 and 8 o\u0026rsquo;clock positions. The leading and trailing haptics were externalised sequentially, cauterised to form flanges, and repositioned into the scleral tunnels. A 3.0-mm sclero-corneal incision was closed using 10\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0 nylon sutures.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRefractive and corneal astigmatism measurements were obtained at six weeks postoperatively prior to sclero-corneal suture removal.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eVitreous Management Groups\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEyes were categorised into two groups:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eAnterior vitrectomy (AV) group\u003c/b\u003e: Eyes undergoing AV without prior PPV.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePars plana vitrectomy (PPV) group\u003c/b\u003e: Eyes undergoing PPV either as a combined procedure or as a prior staged surgery before YTSFIOL implantation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStatistical Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSnellen visual acuities were converted to LogMAR units. Refractive data were converted to spherical equivalence. Paired t-tests were used for pre- and postoperative comparisons. Independent t-tests or Welch t-tests were used for between-group comparisons. Categorical variables were analysed using Chi-square or Fisher\u0026rsquo;s exact tests. A p-value\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 was considered statistically significant.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"RESULTS","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eBaseline Characteristics\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOf 44 eyes identified, 31 eyes of 30 patients met the inclusion criteria. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics are summarised in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. There were no significant differences between AV and PPV groups in age, axial length, targeted SE, or stage of surgery (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBaseline demographics \u0026amp; clinical characteristics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCharacteristics\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003en (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean (SD)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRange\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of eyes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNumber of patients\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge (years)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e60.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;13.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25, 82\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale (eyes)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22 (71.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale (eyes)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9 (29.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRace\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMalay\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23 (74.2)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eChinese\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7 (22.6)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIndian\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1 (3.2)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUnderlying disease\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eType II Diabetes mellitus\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11 (35.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHypertension\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12 (38.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMarfan\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2 (6.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGlaucoma\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6 (19.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSurgical indication\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDislocated PCIOL\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11 (35.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAphakia\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10 (32.3)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSubluxated Lens\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4 (12.9)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSubluxated IOL\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3 (9.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDislocated Lens\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3 (9.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTypes of vitreous management\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnterior vitrectomy group\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16 (51.6)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePars plana vitrectomy group\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15 (48.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStage of procedure\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePrimary implantation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21 (67.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSecondary implantation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10 (32.3)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIOLs used\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCT Lucia 202\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18 (58.1)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEyecryl Plus TP600\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7 (22.6)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSensar AR40e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6 (19.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAxial Length (mm)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.55\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.62, 27.03\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePreoperative BCVA (LogMAR)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.00, 0.78\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePreoperative SE (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.83\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-13.50, 13.38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTargeted SE (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.31\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.67, 0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePreoperative refractive astigmatism (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.06\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-5.50, 0.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eImplanted IOL power (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.15\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.85\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.0, 27.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFollow up duration (days)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43.45\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;11.26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e27.0, 71.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eOverall Visual and Refractive Outcomes\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAt six weeks postoperatively, mean BCVA improved significantly from 0.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.24 to 0.14\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.10 LogMAR (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.041). Mean SE improved from +\u0026thinsp;4.83\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.39 D to \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.70\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.90 D (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). Both refractive astigmatism and corneal astigmatism increased significantly at six weeks (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVisual outcomes before and after operation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth rowspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean values\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth rowspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStatistical test values\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth rowspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ep values\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePreoperative\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePostoperative\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBest corrected visual acuity (LogMAR)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.14\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0.041\u003c/strong\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpherical equivalence (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.83\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.39\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.70\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/strong\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRefractive Astigmatism (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.06\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.18\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.45\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0.003\u003c/strong\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCorneal Astigmatism (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.63\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.47\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.46\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.79\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.99\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e0.006\u003c/strong\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003ePaired t test\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBaseline demographics and clinical characteristics in between anterior vitrectomy (AV) \u0026amp; pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) groups\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAV (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;16)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePPV (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStatistical test values\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ep values\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"6\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"BoldUnderline\"\u003eBaseline Characteristic\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAge (years)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e58\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;18\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e64\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et = -1.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.259\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAxial length (mm)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.44\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.22\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et = -0.47\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.641\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTargeted spherical equivalence (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.36\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et = -1.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.085\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStage of surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePrimary\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9 (56.3%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12 (80%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.252\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSecondary\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7 (43.7%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3 (20%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"5\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTypes of primary YTSFIOL as anterior segment surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLens aspiration (n, %)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3 (33.3%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIOL explantation (n, %)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3 (33.3%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePhacoemulsification (n, %)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1 (11.1%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eECCE (n, %)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1 (11.1%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eICCE (n, %)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1 (11.1%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTypes of primary YTSFIOL as posterior segment surgery\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;12)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIOL explantation (n, %)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4 (33.3%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePhacofragmentation (n, %)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8 (66.7%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003eWelch t test\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003eIndependent student t test\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003eFisher\u0026rsquo;s exact test\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003eComparison Between AV and PPV Groups\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo statistically significant differences were observed between AV and PPV groups in postoperative BCVA, SE, refractive astigmatism, corneal astigmatism, or SE prediction error (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003ctable id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVisual outcomes in between anterior vitrectomy (AV) and pars plana vitrectomy (PPV)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnterior Vitrectomy Group (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;16)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePars Plana Vitrectomy Group (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStatistical test values\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ep values\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePostoperative best corrected visual acuity (LogMAR)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.13\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.16\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.504\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePostoperative spherical equivalence (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.61\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.80\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.565\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePostoperative refractive astigmatism (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.56\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.77\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et = -1.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.128\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePostoperative corneal astigmatism (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.80\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.96\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-2.09\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et = -1.10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.281\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTargeted Spherical Equivalence (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.36\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et = -1.80\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.085\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePostoperative Spherical Equivalence (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.61\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.80\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.58\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.565\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSpherical Equivalence Prediction Error (D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.32\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.12\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-0.45\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003et\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.41\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.682\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003ctfoot\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003eIndependent Student t-test\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003eWelch t test\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tfoot\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5: Summary of journals related to refractive outcomes in YTSFIOL implantation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(A) \u003cstrong\u003e\u003cu\u003eBest-corrected visual acuity in YTSFIOL implantation\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" width=\"604\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor, year\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy Design\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 108px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTitle\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 166px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDuration of follow up\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 81px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLens for SFIOL\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Yamane S, Sato S, et al. 2017)\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProspective, non-randomised, interventional case series of 100 eyes from 97 consecutive patients, 25G or 27G secondary PPV, 30G thin wall needles\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 108px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFlanged intrascleral intraocular lens fixation with double-needle technique\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 166px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean Preoperative \u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;BCVA = 0.25 \u0026plusmn; 0.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAt 6 months,\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Mean Postoperative BCVA = \u0026nbsp;0.11 \u0026plusmn; 0.36 (p\u0026lt;0.01)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAt 12 months,\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Mean Postoperative BCVA = 0.09 \u0026plusmn; 0.31 (p\u0026lt;0.01)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAt 24 months,\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Mean Postoperative BCVA = 0.12 \u0026plusmn; 0.34 (p=0.03)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAt 36 months,\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Mean Postoperative BCVA = 0.04 \u0026plusmn;0.25 (p=0.10)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAt 6, 12, 24, 36 months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean = 20.6 \u0026plusmn; 10.0 months\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 81px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eX-70 (Santen),\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZA9003 (Aboott Medical Optics),\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePN6A (Kowa), or\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMA60MA (Alcon)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Besozzi G, Chiara Posarelli, et al. 2021)\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProspective, interventional, consecutive case series of 12 eyes with complicated phacoemulsification, done 23G PPV, phacofragmentation and 30G thin-walled needle primary YTSFIOL (with Yamane double-needle-stabilizer), single surgeons\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 108px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStandardized flanged intraslecral intraocular lens fixation with the double-needle technique for cataract luxation in the vitreous chamber during phacoemulsification\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 166px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean Preoperative\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;BCVA = 1.16 \u0026plusmn; 0.30 significantly improved to 0.05 \u0026plusmn; 0.06 (Postoperative) (p\u0026lt;0.05)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAt 6 months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 81px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePU6AS (Kowa)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Yavuzer K, Evcimen Y et al. 2019)\u003csup\u003e5\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRetrospective review of 21 cases underwent modified Yamane technique with 27G sutureless transconjunctival intrascleral IOL fixation, single needle, single cornea port, 2mm scleral tunnel)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 108px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSutureless transconjunctival intrascleral intraocular lens fixation: the modified Yamane technique\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 166px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean Preoperative BCVA improved from 0.21\u0026nbsp;\u0026plusmn; 0.88 to Postoperative BCVA of 0.09 \u0026plusmn; 0.85 (p = 0.001)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAt 3 months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 81px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEyecryl Plus TP6130 (Biotech Vision Care)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Rishi P, Shelke K, et al. 2021)\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRetrospective study of 47 eyes of 46 patients underwent YTSFIOL implantation combined with 3-port 30G PPV\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 108px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSurgical outcomes and complications of sutureless needle-guided intrascleral intraocular lens fixation combined with vitrectomy as single-stage procedure\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 166px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean Preoperative BCVA improved from 0.79 to Postoperative BCVA of 0.39\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;(No statistical test done)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMeans = 4.21 months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 81px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSensar AR40e (Abbott Medical Optics)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(B) \u003cu\u003eSpherical equivalence \u0026amp; spherical prediction error in YTSFIOL implantation\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" width=\"595\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor, year\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy Design\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTitle\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 165px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDuration of follow up\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLens\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Yamane S, Sato S, et al. 2017)\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProspective, nonrandomised, interventional case series of 100 eyes from 97 consecutive patients, 25G or 27G Secondary PPV, 30G thin-wall needles\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFlanged intrascleral intraocular lens fixation with double-needle technique\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 165px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePreop SE = +5.28 \u0026plusmn; 6.90 D\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;(Range: -4.88 to 14.25 D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePE = -0.21 \u0026plusmn; 0.99 D\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean = 20.6 \u0026plusmn; 10.0 months\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eX-70 (Santen)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZA9003 (Aboott Medical Optics)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePN6A (Kowa)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMA60MA (Alcon)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Besozzi G, Chiara Posarelli, et al. 2021)\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProspective, interventional, consecutive case series of 12 eyes after complicated phacoemulsification, done 23G PPV, phacofragmentation \u0026amp; 30G thin-walled needle primary YTSFIOL (with Yamane double neede stabilizer), single surgeons\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStandardized flanged intraslecral intraocular lens fixation with the double-needle technique for cataract luxation in the vitreous chamber during phacoemulsification\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 165px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTarget SE = -0.20 \u0026plusmn; -0.09 D\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;(range: -0.08 to -0.37 D)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFinal SE = -0.44 \u0026plusmn; -0.14 D\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;(range: -0.25 to -0.75 D)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo significant difference\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;(p = 0.87)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAt 6 months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePU6AS (Kowa)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Rishi P, Shelke K, et al. 2021)\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRetrospective study of 47 eyes of 46 patients underwent Yamane SFIOL combined with 3-port 23G or 26G PPV\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSurgical outcomes and complications of sutureless 30G needle-guided intrascleral intraocular lens fixation combined with vitrectomy\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 165px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePreoperative SE = +7.64D \u0026plusmn; \u0026minus;7.74D\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePostoperative SE = -0.47 \u0026plusmn; \u0026minus;2.26D\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;(no reported statistical test done)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean = 4.21 months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSensar AR40e (Abbott Medical Optics)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Lee R, Govindaraju et al. 2021)\u003csup\u003e7\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRetrospective, consecutive cohort, single centre, multiple surgeons, 84 eyes of 80 patients\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRefractive outcomes after sutureless intrascleral fixation of intraocular lens with pars plana vitrectomy\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 165px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePreoperative SE not documented.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAt 3 months,\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Postoperative SE = -0.50 \u0026plusmn; 1.59 D and change of SE = 0.58 \u0026plusmn; 1.49 D. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAt 1-year,\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Postoperative SE = -0.55 \u0026plusmn; 1.32 D and change of SE = 0.39 \u0026plusmn; 1.42 D\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThere was no difference between SE or change of SE throughout follow-up (p\u0026nbsp;= 0.97 and\u0026nbsp;p\u0026nbsp;= 0.96, respectively).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAt 3 to 12 months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean = 2.33 \u0026plusmn; 1.36 years.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMA60AC (Alcon)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eor ZA9003 (Abbott Medical Optics)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Veysel Aykut, Fehim Esen, et al. 2021)\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMixed cohort design. 14 patients underwent (23G or 25G) trocar-assisted sutureless intrascleral IOL implantation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRefractive outcome of trocar-assisted sutureless scleral fixation of 3-piece intraocular lenses\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 165px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePreoperative SE not documented\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Postoperative,\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Mean SE = +0.855 D \u0026plusmn; 1.15 D\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Targeted SE = 0.005 \u0026plusmn; 0.41D\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFinal SE = +0.855 \u0026plusmn; 1.15D (Statistically different from targeted SE, p=0.034)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean = 16.0 \u0026plusmn; \u0026nbsp;6.5 months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMA60AC (Alcon)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Rocke JR, McGuinness MB, et al. 2020)\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRetrospective consecutive series of 115 YTSFIOL cases, compared with 54 \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; consecutive ACIOL cases (n=54) and 100 routine phacoemulsification with PCIOL cases, multiple surgeon\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRefractive outcomes of the Yamane flanged intrascleral haptic fixation technique\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 165px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePE = +0.04 \u0026plusmn; 0.88D,\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;not statistically different to the \u0026ldquo;in the bag\u0026rdquo; group (-0.10 \u0026plusmn; 0.53D), p = 0.185\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;in the bag\u0026rdquo; placement had a significantly greater proportion of cases with PE within \u0026plusmn;0.50 D (72%), compared to SFIOL (50%, p = 0.001) \u0026amp; ACIOL (34%, p \u0026lt; 0.001)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMedian absolute error of \u0026ldquo;in the bag\u0026rdquo; (0.32D) was significantly less than SFIOL (p = 0.011) and ACIOL (p \u0026lt; 0.001).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean =\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.7 \u0026plusmn; 3.4 months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZA9003 (Abbott Medical Optics)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(C) \u003cu\u003eSummary of journals related to astigmatism after YTSFIOL implantation\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" width=\"595\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor, year\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy Design\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTitle\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 164px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDuration of follow up\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLens\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Veysel Aykut, Fehim Esen, et al. 2021)\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMixed cohort design. 14 patients underwent trocar-assisted sutureless intrascleral IOL implantation\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRefractive outcome of (23G or 25G) trocar-asssisted sutureless scleral fixation of 3-piece intraocular lenses\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 164px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCorneal astigmatism:\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;There were no significant differences between preoperative (1.09 \u0026plusmn; 0.56) and postoperative corneal astigmatism value (1.59 \u0026plusmn; 0.84) (p=0.17)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThere were also no significant differences between postoperative corneal astigmatism and post-operative total astigmatism.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean =\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;16.0 \u0026plusmn; 6.5 months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMA60AC (Alcon)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Kemer Atik B, Altan C, et al. 2020)\u003csup\u003e10\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProspective study of 94 consecutive patients who underwent scleral-fixated IOL implantation with Z-suture technique, single surgeon\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThe effect of intraocular lens tilt on visual outcomes in scleral-fixated intraocular lens implantation\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 164px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRefractive astigmatism:\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;No significant difference between preoperative (-1.50 \u0026plusmn; 1.20 D) and postoperative (-1.79 \u0026plusmn; 1.38 D) (p = 0.76)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCorneal astigmatism:\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;No significant difference between preoperative (-1.54 \u0026plusmn; 1.76D) and postoperative corneal astigmatism (-1.65 \u0026plusmn; 1.30D) (p = 0.78)\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThere is no statistical difference of visual acuity, refractive error, cylindrical refractive error, and lenticular astigmatism in between patients with a tilt angle of \u0026ge;5\u0026deg; (in horizontal or vertical axis) versus the one with \u0026lt; 5\u0026deg; of tilt.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean =\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;13.8 (range: 0-65 months)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAcrysof MA60AC (Alcon)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(S\u0026uuml;l S, Kaderli A, et al. 2021)\u003csup\u003e11\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRetrospective cross-sectional study 22 eyes with sutureless YTSFIOL vs 16 eyes with sutured SFIOL vs 23 with conventional phacoemulsification. IOL tilt and decentration assessed by Scheimpflug images at 6 months after surgery. Same surgeon\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eComparison of decentration, tilt and lenticular astigmatism of intraocular lens between sutured and sutureless scleral fixation technique\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 164px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLenticular astigmatism significantly lower in sutureless (1.20 \u0026plusmn; 0.53) and control (0.86 \u0026plusmn; 0.40) group than sutured group (1.89 \u0026plusmn; 0.88) (p = 0.003, and p \u0026lt; 0.001)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAngle of tilt at both horizontal \u0026amp; vertical meridians was significantly lower in the sutureless group than sutured group (p=0.008 horizontally, p=0.002 vertically)\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Sutureless IOL and standard phacoemulsification IOL showed similar results in angle of tilt (p\u0026gt;0.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;9,93 \u0026plusmn; 2.64 months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYTSFIOL: AcrySof MA60 (Alcon)\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSutured:\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;9-0 polypropylene sutures, Eyecryl (Biotech healthcare)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 66px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Kashyap S, Walia S, et al. 2019)\u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 113px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eProspective series, 30 eyes of 20 patients with aphakia, subluxated IOL or crustalline lens. 26G SFIOL. Sclerocorneal (SICS) tunnel opened for IOL insertion. Single surgeon.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNovel technique of sutureless glueless scleral fixated intraocular lens\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 164px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePreoperative astigmatism\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;= +0.60 \u0026plusmn; 1.04 D\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Postoperative astigmatism\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;=-0.46 \u0026plusmn; 1.28 D\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Preoperative corneal astigmatism\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;=-0.38 \u0026plusmn; 1.61 D\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;Postoperative corneal astigmatism\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;=-0.16 \u0026plusmn; 1.20 D\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLenticular astigmatism\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;= -0.08 \u0026plusmn; 0.87D (range: -1.75 to +2.00D)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean 3 months\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 71px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAurolens (Aurolab)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(D) \u003cu\u003eSummary of journals related to different vitreous strategies before YTSFIOL implantation\u003c/u\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" width=\"595\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor, year\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 112px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStudy Design\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTitle\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 165px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDuration of follow up\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 73px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLens\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Katarzyna Nowomiejska, Darius Haszcz, et al. 2021)\u003csup\u003e13\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 112px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRetrospective consecutive interventional case series of 30. [14 anterior vitrectomy (AV) vs 16 cases of 23G pars plana vitrectomy (PPV)], 30G needle\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDouble-needle Yamane Technique using flanged haptics in ocular trauma-a retrospective survey of visual outcomes and safety\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 165px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003el BCVA significantly improved after both AV and PPV [improvement of BCVA: AV: 1.09 \u0026plusmn; 0.96, p=0.06; PPV: 0.59 \u0026plusmn; 0.57, p = 0.007].\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSilicone oil tamponated in PPV associated with worse visual acuity. Post lensectomy status was associated with poor visual function in anterior vitrectomy group.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAt 3 months (range 2 to 4 months)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 73px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMA60AC (Alcon)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Cho BJ, Hyeong Gon Yu. 2014)\u003csup\u003e16\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 112px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRetrospective consecutive series study of 83cases underwent 26 gaugle (10-0 polypropylene) needle sutured SFIOL with either pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) or anterior vitrectomy (AV), multiple surgeon\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 109px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSurgical outcomes according to vitreous management after scleral fixation of posterior chamber intraocular lenses\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 165px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBoth groups achieved\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003el Similar Preop BCVA\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;AV: 0.767 \u0026plusmn; 0.864D,\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;PPV: 0.730 \u0026plusmn; 0.698D (p=0.834)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003el Similar Postop BCVA\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;AV: 0.254 \u0026nbsp;\u0026plusmn; 0.629D\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;PPV: 0.233 \u0026nbsp;\u0026plusmn; 0.517D (p=0.864)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003el Similar visual improvement\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;AV: -0.503 \u0026plusmn; 0.677D\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;PPV: -0.486 \u0026nbsp;\u0026plusmn; 0.644D (p=0.911)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003el Similar target SE\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;AV: -0.62 \u0026plusmn; 0.84D,\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;PPV: -0.36 \u0026nbsp;\u0026plusmn; 0.82D (p = 0.163)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003el Similar Postop SE\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;AV: -1.11 \u0026nbsp;\u0026plusmn; 1.21D,\u0026nbsp;\u003cbr\u003e\u0026nbsp;PPV: -1.43 \u0026nbsp;\u0026plusmn; 1.43D (p = 0.330)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 68px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean = 45.9 \u0026plusmn; 34.1 months in AV group\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVersus\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean 41.1 \u0026plusmn; 28.6 months in PPV group\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 73px;\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAcrysof MA60BM (Alcon) or Ya60BBR (Hoya)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003ePostoperative Complications\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSix eyes (19.4%) experienced early postoperative complications. The most common complication was transient intraocular pressure elevation. All complications were managed conservatively or with standard medical or surgical interventions and resolved without long-term sequelae. There were no cases of retinal detachment, endophthalmitis, or significant IOL decentration. Complication rates did not differ significantly between AV and PPV groups (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.335).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"DISCUSSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study demonstrates that YTSFIOL implantation provides significant improvement in visual acuity and predictable refractive outcomes as early as six weeks postoperatively. To our knowledge, this is among the earliest evaluations of refractive outcomes following YTSFIOL implantation and the first to compare outcomes according to vitreous management strategy at this ultra-short-term time point.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe improvements in BCVA and SE observed at six weeks were comparable to outcomes reported at three months or later in previous studies.\u0026sup3;\u003csup\u003e,\u003c/sup\u003e⁶\u003csup\u003e,\u003c/sup\u003e⁷ These findings support the hypothesis that rapid healing of small-gauge scleral tunnels may permit early refractive stability following YTSFIOL implantation.\u0026sup1;⁴\u003csup\u003e,\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026sup1;⁵\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe absence of significant differences between AV and PPV groups suggests that the choice of vitreous management strategy does not adversely affect early refractive outcomes. This finding is consistent with previous studies evaluating longer-term outcomes using both sutureless and sutured SFIOL techniques.\u0026sup1;\u0026sup3;\u003csup\u003e,\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026sup1;⁶\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe observed increase in refractive and corneal astigmatism at six weeks is likely attributable to sclero-corneal sutures, as measurements were obtained prior to suture removal. Similar findings have been reported in other scleral fixation studies.⁸\u003csup\u003e,\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026sup1;⁰\u003csup\u003e,\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026sup1;\u0026sup1; Longer-term follow-up is required to determine the stability of astigmatic outcomes following suture removal.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStrengths and Limitations\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrengths of this study include the evaluation of ultra-short-term refractive outcomes and elimination of inter-surgeon variability. Limitations include the retrospective design, small sample size, and lack of long-term follow-up.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"CONCLUSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eYTSFIOL implantation results in significant improvement in visual acuity and predictable refractive outcomes as early as six weeks postoperatively, irrespective of vitreous management strategy. These findings support YTSFIOL implantation as an effective option for early visual rehabilitation in aphakic eyes without capsular support.\u003c/p\u003e "},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCOMPETING INTEREST\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eETHICS APPROVAL\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the\u0026nbsp;Medical Research \u0026amp; Ethics Committee (MREC), Ministry of Health, Malaysia.(16\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e August 2023/NMRR ID: 23-01005-QOL (IIR))\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCONSENT TO PARTICIPATE\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInformed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCONSENT TO PUBLISH\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors affirm that human research participants provided informed consent for publication of the images in Figure1.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKumar B, Muni I. Scleral fixation of intraocular lenses. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK570585/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK570585/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChan TCY, Lam JK, Jhanji V, Li EYM. Comparison of outcomes of primary anterior chamber versus secondary scleral-fixated intraocular lens implantation in complicated cataract surgeries. \u003cem\u003eAm J Ophthalmol\u003c/em\u003e. 2015;159(2):221\u0026ndash;226.e2. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.ajo.2014.10.016\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ajo.2014.10.016\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYamane S, Sato S, Maruyama-Inoue M, Kadonosono K. Flanged intrascleral intraocular lens fixation with double-needle technique. \u003cem\u003eOphthalmology\u003c/em\u003e. 2017;124(8):1136\u0026ndash;1142. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.03.036\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.03.036\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBesozzi G, Posarelli C, Costa MC, et al. Standardized flanged intrascleral intraocular lens fixation with the double-needle technique for cataract luxation in the vitreous chamber during phacoemulsification. \u003cem\u003eJ Ophthalmol\u003c/em\u003e. 2021;2021:9998482. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1155/2021/9998482\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1155/2021/9998482\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYavuzer K, Evcimen Y. Sutureless transconjunctival intrascleral intraocular lens fixation: the modified Yamane technique. \u003cem\u003eArq Bras Oftalmol\u003c/em\u003e. 2019;82(5):401\u0026ndash;405. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.5935/0004-2749.20190072\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5935/0004-2749.20190072\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRishi P, Shelke K, Rishi E. Surgical outcomes and complications of sutureless needle-guided intrascleral intraocular lens fixation combined with vitrectomy. \u003cem\u003eIndian J Ophthalmol\u003c/em\u003e. 2021;69(9):2317\u0026ndash;2323. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.4103/ijo.IJO_1636_20\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4103/ijo.IJO_1636_20\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLee R, Govindaraju V, Farley ND, et al. Refractive outcomes after sutureless intrascleral fixation of intraocular lens with pars plana vitrectomy. \u003cem\u003eRetina\u003c/em\u003e. 2021;41(4):822\u0026ndash;829. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1097/IAE.0000000000002916\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1097/IAE.0000000000002916\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAykut V, Esen F, Sali F, Oguz H. Refractive outcome of trocar-assisted sutureless scleral fixation of 3-piece intraocular lenses. \u003cem\u003eInt Ophthalmol\u003c/em\u003e. 2021;41(8):2689\u0026ndash;2694. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/s10792-021-01824-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10792-021-01824-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRocke JR, McGuinness MB, Atkins WK, et al. Refractive outcomes of the Yamane flanged intrascleral haptic fixation technique. \u003cem\u003eOphthalmology\u003c/em\u003e. 2020;127(10):1429\u0026ndash;1431. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.03.032\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.03.032\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAtik BK, Altan C, Agca A, et al. The effect of intraocular lens tilt on visual outcomes in scleral-fixated intraocular lens implantation. \u003cem\u003eInt Ophthalmol\u003c/em\u003e. 2020;40(3):717\u0026ndash;724. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/s10792-019-01233-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10792-019-01233-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eS\u0026uuml;l S, Kaderli A, Karalezli A, Kaya C. Comparison of decentration, tilt and lenticular astigmatism of intraocular lens between sutured and sutureless scleral fixation techniques. \u003cem\u003eJ Fr Ophtalmol\u003c/em\u003e. 2021;44(8):1174\u0026ndash;1179. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.jfo.2020.12.031\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jfo.2020.12.031\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKashyap S, Walia S, Bhaisare V, Rawat P, Kori N. Novel technique of sutureless glueless scleral fixated intraocular lens. \u003cem\u003eIndian J Ophthalmol\u003c/em\u003e. 2019;67(1):64\u0026ndash;68. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.4103/ijo.IJO_447_18\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4103/ijo.IJO_447_18\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNowomiejska K, Haszcz D, Onyszkiewicz M, et al. Double-needle Yamane technique using flanged haptics in ocular trauma: a retrospective survey of visual outcomes and safety. \u003cem\u003eJ Clin Med\u003c/em\u003e. 2021;10(12):2562. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/jcm10122562\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/jcm10122562\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHikichi T, Yoshida A, Hasegawa T, Ohnishi M, Sato T, Muraoka S. Wound healing of scleral self-sealing incision: a comparison of ultrasound biomicroscopy and histology findings. \u003cem\u003eGraefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol\u003c/em\u003e. 1998;236(10):775\u0026ndash;778. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/s004170050157\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s004170050157\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSawada T, Kakinoki M, Sawada O, Kawamura H, Ohji M. Closure of sclerotomies after 25- and 23-gauge transconjunctival sutureless pars plana vitrectomy evaluated by optical coherence tomography. \u003cem\u003eOphthalmic Res\u003c/em\u003e. 2010;45(3):122\u0026ndash;128. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1159/000318875\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1159/000318875\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCho BJ, Yu HG. Surgical outcomes according to vitreous management after scleral fixation of posterior chamber intraocular lenses. \u003cem\u003eRetina\u003c/em\u003e. 2014;34(10):1977\u0026ndash;1984. doi:\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1097/IAE.0000000000000168\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1097/IAE.0000000000000168\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"international-ophthalmology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"inte","sideBox":"Learn more about [International Ophthalmology](https://www.springer.com/journal/10792)","snPcode":"10792","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10792/3","title":"International Ophthalmology","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Yamane technique, scleral-fixated intraocular lens, refractive outcomes, anterior vitrectomy, pars plana vitrectomy","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8687927/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8687927/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003ch2\u003eBackground\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Yamane technique for sutureless scleral-fixated intraocular lens (YTSFIOL) implantation is an established option for visual rehabilitation in eyes without capsular support. However, evidence on ultra-short-term refractive outcomes and the influence of different vitreous management strategies remains limited.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMethods\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis retrospective observational cohort study included consecutive adult patients who underwent YTSFIOL implantation by a single surgeon at a tertiary centre. Ultra-short-term outcomes were defined as visual and refractive outcomes assessed at six weeks postoperatively. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), spherical equivalence (SE), refractive astigmatism, and corneal astigmatism were analysed and compared between eyes that underwent anterior vitrectomy (AV) and pars plana vitrectomy (PPV).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResults\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThirty-one eyes of 30 patients were included. Mean BCVA improved significantly from 0.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.24 LogMAR preoperatively to 0.14\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.10 LogMAR at six weeks postoperatively (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.041). Mean SE improved from +\u0026thinsp;4.83\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.39 D to \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.70\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.90 D (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) and did not differ significantly from the targeted SE (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.056). Both refractive and corneal astigmatism increased significantly at six weeks. No statistically significant differences were observed between AV and PPV groups in postoperative BCVA, SE, refractive astigmatism, corneal astigmatism, or SE prediction error (all p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05). Early postoperative complication rates were comparable between groups (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.335).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConclusion\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eYTSFIOL implantation provides significant improvement in visual acuity and predictable refractive outcomes as early as six weeks postoperatively, irrespective of vitreous management strategy.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Ultra-Short-Term Refractive Outcomes After Yamane Technique Scleral-Fixated Intraocular Lens Implantation: A Comparison of Anterior Vitrectomy and Pars Plana Vitrectomy","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-02-03 15:51:33","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8687927/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2026-02-15T18:37:43+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-02-15T16:33:56+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"257253924958354449141493938110121720848","date":"2026-02-14T07:34:06+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2026-02-01T12:15:57+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"336912656815966614926952595084552105940","date":"2026-02-01T01:48:53+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"6995550924146505228939127076775215009","date":"2026-01-29T21:42:05+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-01-29T20:35:05+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-01-28T15:04:00+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2026-01-28T14:58:47+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"International Ophthalmology","date":"2026-01-24T15:32:11+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"international-ophthalmology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"inte","sideBox":"Learn more about [International Ophthalmology](https://www.springer.com/journal/10792)","snPcode":"10792","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10792/3","title":"International Ophthalmology","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"4be30aad-9d04-4ef3-a363-fe830472051a","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 3rd, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-13T16:05:54+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-8687927","link":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-026-04057-z","journal":{"identity":"international-ophthalmology","isVorOnly":false,"title":"International Ophthalmology"},"publishedOn":"2026-04-06 15:58:15","publishedOnDateReadable":"April 6th, 2026"},"versionCreatedAt":"2026-02-03 15:51:33","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1007/s10792-026-04057-z","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-026-04057-z","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8687927","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8687927","identity":"rs-8687927","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}