Purpose:

To evaluate the deviation from the planned axis of 3 types of toric intraocular lenses (IOLs), SN6AT (AcrySof® IQ Toric, alcon), POD FT (FineVision, PhysIOL), ZXT (TECNIS Symfony® Toric, AMO).

Methods:

One hundred and ninety eyes with a toric IOL implantation, operated by 2 surgeons using 2 different marking techniques, were retrospectively reviewed. Three types of IOLs were compered: 90 cases with SN6AT, 50 cases with POD FT and 50 cases with ZXT. All eyes had preoperative corneal astigmatism measurements using the IOL master. At least 1 month postoperatively, the IOL was photographed and the IOL axis was measured using a purpose-designed software. The difference between the planned and the actual alignment was determined. The effect of IOL type, astigmatism direction and surgeons marking techniques on the deviation from the planned axis and its direction were evaluated and compered.

Results:

The average deviation from the planned axis was similar for the different IOLs (ZXT - 4.030±4.34, POD FT - 3.520±3.38 and SN6AT IOLs - 4.240±4.10), as its direction (55.8%, 39.0% and 56.6% clockwise (CW) deviation, respectively). A statistically significant higher percentage of CW deviation was seen in with the rule (WTR) astigmatism eyes compared with against the rule (ATR) and oblique astigmatism eyes (64.3%, 43.8% and 41.7%, respectively, P = 0.027). The direction of astigmatism did not influence the mean degree of rotation (4.400±4.38, 3.840±3.84 and 3.130±2.79, respectively). No difference found in degree and direction of the deviation between the two surgeons marking techniques.

Conclusions:

IOL type did not influence the magnitude and direction of the toric IOL deviation from the planned axis. We found more CW deviation in WTR astigmatism than in ATR and oblique astigmatism, with no difference in its magnitude. No difference was found when comparing the two surgeons marking techniques in the degree and direction of the deviation.