ICL versus Veriflex phakic IOL for treatment of moderately high myopia: randomized paired-eye comparison.

PURPOSE To compare the objective and subjective outcome of implantable collamer lenses (ICLs; Staar Surgical, Monrovia, CA) versus Veriflex lenses (AMO, Santa Ana, CA) for the correction of moderately high myopia. METHODS A prospective randomized comparative eye study was performed on 24 patients with bilateral myopia that ranged from -6 to -14.5 diopters (D). One eye was implanted with an ICL and the other eye was implanted with a Veriflex phakic intraocular lens (PIOL). Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), higher-order aberrations (HOAs), contrast sensitivity, patient satisfaction, central endothelial cell count, and PIOL centration were determined 6 months after surgery RESULTS The logMAR UDVA and CDVA improved significantly in both groups (P < .001). There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative logMAR UDVA (P = .41) or logMAR CDVA (P = .36) between the two groups. Postoperative deviation from target refraction was -0.06 ± 0.41 D in the ICL group and -0.07 ± 0.49 D in the Veriflex group (P = .15). The difference in both induced and absolute postoperative HOAs between groups was not statistically significant. The area under the log contrast sensitivity function increased significantly in both groups postoperatively. The difference in patient satisfaction between both PIOLs was not statistically significant. A higher but statistically insignificant central endothelial cell count loss occurred in the Veriflex group (P = .11). CONCLUSION Both ICL and Veriflex PIOLs have equally satisfactory objective and subjective visual outcomes after surgery.