[Comparative evaluation of intracapsular cataract extraction, extracapsular cataract extraction and phacoemulsification].

In 1978 at the beginning of the modern lens implantation era, 6160 posterior chamber lenses (PCL) were implanted in the USA; 1,110,000 PCL were implanted in 1986. With reference to the total number of lenses implanted, PCL implantations amounted to 4% in 1978 and to 89% in 1986. The increasing use of PCL has mainly been due to the fact that patients with these lenses had significantly better visual acuity and fewer complications after surgery than patients with anterior chamber lenses (ACL). As an example, an FDH study in 1983 should be mentioned: more vision in an otherwise normal eye was more than 0.5: 90% (ACL) versus 94% (PLC); ablatio: 0.9% versus 0.5%; secondary glaucoma: 1.2% versus 0.5%; cystoid edema of the macula: 2.2% versus 0.8%. The considerable advantage in extracapsular extraction of a cataract lies in the fact that the anatomical and physiological conditions of the eye structure may be nearly completely maintained, and this is because the intact posterior capsule--similar to the lens with zonular fibers in the normal eye--forms a diaphragm between the vitreous and aqueous humor. Thus the stability of the eye will be maintained and prolapse of the vitreous with possible traction at the retina cannot occur. Phacoemulsification and ECCE are well-established methods. The clinical results of both methods are practically identical, except for a significantly lower rate of astigmatism with phacoemulsification, which was examined 8 to 10 weeks following surgery (phaco: 1.0 +/- 0.49; expression: 3.3 +/- 1.7).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)