12 year results of a prospective trial comparing poly(methyl methacrylate) and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses
Identifieur interne : 001514 ( PascalFrancis/Corpus ); précédent : 001513; suivant : 00151512 year results of a prospective trial comparing poly(methyl methacrylate) and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses
Auteurs : A. J. Khan ; S. P. B. PercivalSource :
- Journal of cataract and refractive surgery [ 0886-3350 ] ; 1999.
Descripteurs français
- Pascal (Inist)
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
Abstract
Purpose: To compare long-term biocompatibility of single-piece poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (P-HEMA) intraocular lenses (IOLS). Setting: District General Hospital, United Kingdom. Methods: In a prospective trial of 250 eyes that had uncomplicated extracapsular cataract extraction, 2 groups of 125 eyes each were matched for age and sex. One group received single-piece looped PMMA IOLs and the other, single-piece solid-haptic P-HEMA lOLs. In all eyes, the lOLs were implanted in the capsular bag at the time of surgery using the envelope technique. Results: Twelve years after surgery, 75 eyes were available for examination. In the PMMA group (40 eyes), 50% had a visual acuity of 20/20 and 50% had intact capsules, many of them with a degree of fibrosis. In the P-HEMA group (35 eyes), 71% had an acuity of 20/20 and 80% had intact capsules (P = .0085). Conclusion: In the long term, biocompatibility was better in the P-HEMA group than in the PMMA group.
Notice en format standard (ISO 2709)
Pour connaître la documentation sur le format Inist Standard.
| pA |
|
|---|
Format Inist (serveur)
| NO : | PASCAL 99-0538184 INIST |
|---|---|
| ET : | 12 year results of a prospective trial comparing poly(methyl methacrylate) and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses |
| AU : | KHAN (A. J.); PERCIVAL (S. P. B.) |
| AF : | Department of Ophthalmology, Scarborough Hospital/Scarborough/Royaume-Uni (1 aut., 2 aut.) |
| DT : | Publication en série; Niveau analytique |
| SO : | Journal of cataract and refractive surgery; ISSN 0886-3350; Coden JCSUEV; Etats-Unis; Da. 1999; Vol. 25; No. 10; Pp. 1404-1407; Bibl. 12 ref. |
| LA : | Anglais |
| EA : | Purpose: To compare long-term biocompatibility of single-piece poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (P-HEMA) intraocular lenses (IOLS). Setting: District General Hospital, United Kingdom. Methods: In a prospective trial of 250 eyes that had uncomplicated extracapsular cataract extraction, 2 groups of 125 eyes each were matched for age and sex. One group received single-piece looped PMMA IOLs and the other, single-piece solid-haptic P-HEMA lOLs. In all eyes, the lOLs were implanted in the capsular bag at the time of surgery using the envelope technique. Results: Twelve years after surgery, 75 eyes were available for examination. In the PMMA group (40 eyes), 50% had a visual acuity of 20/20 and 50% had intact capsules, many of them with a degree of fibrosis. In the P-HEMA group (35 eyes), 71% had an acuity of 20/20 and 80% had intact capsules (P = .0085). Conclusion: In the long term, biocompatibility was better in the P-HEMA group than in the PMMA group. |
| CC : | 002B09G |
| FD : | Cataracte; Implantation chirurgicale; Lentille intraoculaire; Méthacrylate de méthyle polymère; Méthacrylate d'hydroxyéthyle polymère; Acuité visuelle; Lampe fente; Etude comparative; Evolution; Postopératoire; Homme; Long terme |
| FG : | Oeil pathologie; Cristallin pathologie; Segment antérieur pathologie; Chirurgie; Biomatériau |
| ED : | Cataract; Surgical implantation; Intraocular lens; Methyl methacrylate polymer; Hydroxyethyl methacrylate polymer; Visual acuity; Slitlamp; Comparative study; Evolution; Postoperative; Human; Long term |
| EG : | Eye disease; Lens disease; Anterior segment disease; Surgery; Biomaterial |
| SD : | Catarata; Implantación quirúrgica; Lente intraocular; Metacrilato de metilo polímero; Metacrilato de hidroxietilo polímero; Acuidad visual; Lámpara hendidura; Estudio comparativo; Evolución; Postoperatorio; Hombre; Largo plazo |
| LO : | INIST-20937.354000089891710170 |
| ID : | 99-0538184 |
Links to Exploration step
Pascal:99-0538184Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en" level="a">12 year results of a prospective trial comparing poly(methyl methacrylate) and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses</title><author><name sortKey="Khan, A J" sort="Khan, A J" uniqKey="Khan A" first="A. J." last="Khan">A. J. Khan</name><affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, Scarborough Hospital</s1><s2>Scarborough</s2><s3>GBR</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ><sZ>2 aut.</sZ></inist:fA14></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Percival, S P B" sort="Percival, S P B" uniqKey="Percival S" first="S. P. B." last="Percival">S. P. B. Percival</name><affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, Scarborough Hospital</s1><s2>Scarborough</s2><s3>GBR</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ><sZ>2 aut.</sZ></inist:fA14></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">INIST</idno><idno type="inist">99-0538184</idno><date when="1999">1999</date><idno type="stanalyst">PASCAL 99-0538184 INIST</idno><idno type="RBID">Pascal:99-0538184</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PascalFrancis/Corpus">001514</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a">12 year results of a prospective trial comparing poly(methyl methacrylate) and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses</title><author><name sortKey="Khan, A J" sort="Khan, A J" uniqKey="Khan A" first="A. J." last="Khan">A. J. Khan</name><affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, Scarborough Hospital</s1><s2>Scarborough</s2><s3>GBR</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ><sZ>2 aut.</sZ></inist:fA14></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Percival, S P B" sort="Percival, S P B" uniqKey="Percival S" first="S. P. B." last="Percival">S. P. B. Percival</name><affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, Scarborough Hospital</s1><s2>Scarborough</s2><s3>GBR</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ><sZ>2 aut.</sZ></inist:fA14></affiliation></author></analytic><series><title level="j" type="main">Journal of cataract and refractive surgery</title><title level="j" type="abbreviated">J. cataract refractive surg.</title><idno type="ISSN">0886-3350</idno><imprint><date when="1999">1999</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><title level="j" type="main">Journal of cataract and refractive surgery</title><title level="j" type="abbreviated">J. cataract refractive surg.</title><idno type="ISSN">0886-3350</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Cataract</term><term>Comparative study</term><term>Evolution</term><term>Human</term><term>Hydroxyethyl methacrylate polymer</term><term>Intraocular lens</term><term>Long term</term><term>Methyl methacrylate polymer</term><term>Postoperative</term><term>Slitlamp</term><term>Surgical implantation</term><term>Visual acuity</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Pascal" xml:lang="fr"><term>Cataracte</term><term>Implantation chirurgicale</term><term>Lentille intraoculaire</term><term>Méthacrylate de méthyle polymère</term><term>Méthacrylate d'hydroxyéthyle polymère</term><term>Acuité visuelle</term><term>Lampe fente</term><term>Etude comparative</term><term>Evolution</term><term>Postopératoire</term><term>Homme</term><term>Long terme</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Purpose: To compare long-term biocompatibility of single-piece poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (P-HEMA) intraocular lenses (IOLS). Setting: District General Hospital, United Kingdom. Methods: In a prospective trial of 250 eyes that had uncomplicated extracapsular cataract extraction, 2 groups of 125 eyes each were matched for age and sex. One group received single-piece looped PMMA IOLs and the other, single-piece solid-haptic P-HEMA lOLs. In all eyes, the lOLs were implanted in the capsular bag at the time of surgery using the envelope technique. Results: Twelve years after surgery, 75 eyes were available for examination. In the PMMA group (40 eyes), 50% had a visual acuity of 20/20 and 50% had intact capsules, many of them with a degree of fibrosis. In the P-HEMA group (35 eyes), 71% had an acuity of 20/20 and 80% had intact capsules (P = .0085). Conclusion: In the long term, biocompatibility was better in the P-HEMA group than in the PMMA group.</div></front></TEI><inist><standard h6="B"><pA><fA01 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>0886-3350</s0></fA01><fA02 i1="01"><s0>JCSUEV</s0></fA02><fA03 i2="1"><s0>J. cataract refractive surg.</s0></fA03><fA05><s2>25</s2></fA05><fA06><s2>10</s2></fA06><fA08 i1="01" i2="1" l="ENG"><s1>12 year results of a prospective trial comparing poly(methyl methacrylate) and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses</s1></fA08><fA11 i1="01" i2="1"><s1>KHAN (A. J.)</s1></fA11><fA11 i1="02" i2="1"><s1>PERCIVAL (S. P. B.)</s1></fA11><fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, Scarborough Hospital</s1><s2>Scarborough</s2><s3>GBR</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ><sZ>2 aut.</sZ></fA14><fA20><s1>1404-1407</s1></fA20><fA21><s1>1999</s1></fA21><fA23 i1="01"><s0>ENG</s0></fA23><fA43 i1="01"><s1>INIST</s1><s2>20937</s2><s5>354000089891710170</s5></fA43><fA44><s0>0000</s0><s1>© 1999 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.</s1></fA44><fA45><s0>12 ref.</s0></fA45><fA47 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>99-0538184</s0></fA47><fA60><s1>P</s1></fA60><fA61><s0>A</s0></fA61><fA64 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>Journal of cataract and refractive surgery</s0></fA64><fA66 i1="01"><s0>USA</s0></fA66><fC01 i1="01" l="ENG"><s0>Purpose: To compare long-term biocompatibility of single-piece poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (P-HEMA) intraocular lenses (IOLS). Setting: District General Hospital, United Kingdom. Methods: In a prospective trial of 250 eyes that had uncomplicated extracapsular cataract extraction, 2 groups of 125 eyes each were matched for age and sex. One group received single-piece looped PMMA IOLs and the other, single-piece solid-haptic P-HEMA lOLs. In all eyes, the lOLs were implanted in the capsular bag at the time of surgery using the envelope technique. Results: Twelve years after surgery, 75 eyes were available for examination. In the PMMA group (40 eyes), 50% had a visual acuity of 20/20 and 50% had intact capsules, many of them with a degree of fibrosis. In the P-HEMA group (35 eyes), 71% had an acuity of 20/20 and 80% had intact capsules (P = .0085). Conclusion: In the long term, biocompatibility was better in the P-HEMA group than in the PMMA group.</s0></fC01><fC02 i1="01" i2="X"><s0>002B09G</s0></fC02><fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Cataracte</s0><s5>01</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Cataract</s0><s5>01</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Catarata</s0><s5>01</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Implantation chirurgicale</s0><s5>04</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Surgical implantation</s0><s5>04</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Implantación quirúrgica</s0><s5>04</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Lentille intraoculaire</s0><s5>05</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Intraocular lens</s0><s5>05</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Lente intraocular</s0><s5>05</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Méthacrylate de méthyle polymère</s0><s2>NK</s2><s5>07</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Methyl methacrylate polymer</s0><s2>NK</s2><s5>07</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Metacrilato de metilo polímero</s0><s2>NK</s2><s5>07</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Méthacrylate d'hydroxyéthyle polymère</s0><s2>NK</s2><s5>08</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Hydroxyethyl methacrylate polymer</s0><s2>NK</s2><s5>08</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Metacrilato de hidroxietilo polímero</s0><s2>NK</s2><s5>08</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Acuité visuelle</s0><s5>10</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Visual acuity</s0><s5>10</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Acuidad visual</s0><s5>10</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Lampe fente</s0><s5>13</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Slitlamp</s0><s5>13</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Lámpara hendidura</s0><s5>13</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Etude comparative</s0><s5>16</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Comparative study</s0><s5>16</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Estudio comparativo</s0><s5>16</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="09" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Evolution</s0><s5>17</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="09" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Evolution</s0><s5>17</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="09" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Evolución</s0><s5>17</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="10" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Postopératoire</s0><s5>18</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="10" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Postoperative</s0><s5>18</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="10" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Postoperatorio</s0><s5>18</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="11" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Homme</s0><s5>20</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="11" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Human</s0><s5>20</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="11" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Hombre</s0><s5>20</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="12" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Long terme</s0><s5>23</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="12" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Long term</s0><s5>23</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="12" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Largo plazo</s0><s5>23</s5></fC03><fC07 i1="01" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Oeil pathologie</s0><s5>37</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="01" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Eye disease</s0><s5>37</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="01" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Ojo patología</s0><s5>37</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="02" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Cristallin pathologie</s0><s5>38</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="02" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Lens disease</s0><s5>38</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="02" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Cristalino patología</s0><s5>38</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="03" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Segment antérieur pathologie</s0><s2>NM</s2><s5>39</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="03" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Anterior segment disease</s0><s2>NM</s2><s5>39</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="03" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Segmento anterior patología</s0><s2>NM</s2><s5>39</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="04" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Chirurgie</s0><s5>45</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="04" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Surgery</s0><s5>45</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="04" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Cirugía</s0><s5>45</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="05" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Biomatériau</s0><s5>53</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="05" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Biomaterial</s0><s5>53</s5></fC07><fC07 i1="05" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Biomaterial</s0><s5>53</s5></fC07><fN21><s1>347</s1></fN21></pA></standard><server><NO>PASCAL 99-0538184 INIST</NO><ET>12 year results of a prospective trial comparing poly(methyl methacrylate) and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses</ET><AU>KHAN (A. J.); PERCIVAL (S. P. B.)</AU><AF>Department of Ophthalmology, Scarborough Hospital/Scarborough/Royaume-Uni (1 aut., 2 aut.)</AF><DT>Publication en série; Niveau analytique</DT><SO>Journal of cataract and refractive surgery; ISSN 0886-3350; Coden JCSUEV; Etats-Unis; Da. 1999; Vol. 25; No. 10; Pp. 1404-1407; Bibl. 12 ref.</SO><LA>Anglais</LA><EA>Purpose: To compare long-term biocompatibility of single-piece poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (P-HEMA) intraocular lenses (IOLS). Setting: District General Hospital, United Kingdom. Methods: In a prospective trial of 250 eyes that had uncomplicated extracapsular cataract extraction, 2 groups of 125 eyes each were matched for age and sex. One group received single-piece looped PMMA IOLs and the other, single-piece solid-haptic P-HEMA lOLs. In all eyes, the lOLs were implanted in the capsular bag at the time of surgery using the envelope technique. Results: Twelve years after surgery, 75 eyes were available for examination. In the PMMA group (40 eyes), 50% had a visual acuity of 20/20 and 50% had intact capsules, many of them with a degree of fibrosis. In the P-HEMA group (35 eyes), 71% had an acuity of 20/20 and 80% had intact capsules (P = .0085). Conclusion: In the long term, biocompatibility was better in the P-HEMA group than in the PMMA group.</EA><CC>002B09G</CC><FD>Cataracte; Implantation chirurgicale; Lentille intraoculaire; Méthacrylate de méthyle polymère; Méthacrylate d'hydroxyéthyle polymère; Acuité visuelle; Lampe fente; Etude comparative; Evolution; Postopératoire; Homme; Long terme</FD><FG>Oeil pathologie; Cristallin pathologie; Segment antérieur pathologie; Chirurgie; Biomatériau</FG><ED>Cataract; Surgical implantation; Intraocular lens; Methyl methacrylate polymer; Hydroxyethyl methacrylate polymer; Visual acuity; Slitlamp; Comparative study; Evolution; Postoperative; Human; Long term</ED><EG>Eye disease; Lens disease; Anterior segment disease; Surgery; Biomaterial</EG><SD>Catarata; Implantación quirúrgica; Lente intraocular; Metacrilato de metilo polímero; Metacrilato de hidroxietilo polímero; Acuidad visual; Lámpara hendidura; Estudio comparativo; Evolución; Postoperatorio; Hombre; Largo plazo</SD><LO>INIST-20937.354000089891710170</LO><ID>99-0538184</ID></server></inist></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Ticri/CIDE/explor/HapticV1/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001514 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001514 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Ticri/CIDE
|area= HapticV1
|flux= PascalFrancis
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= Pascal:99-0538184
|texte= 12 year results of a prospective trial comparing poly(methyl methacrylate) and poly(hydroxyethyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.23. |  |