Helvacı, SezerDemirdüzen, SelahaddinÖksüz, Hüseyin2016-11-302016-11-302016-01Helvacı Sezer, Demirdüzen Selahaddin, Öksüz Hüseyin. Iris‑claw intraocular lens implantation: Anterior chamber versus retropupillary implantation. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology. 2016 Jan; 64(1): 45-49.http://imsear.searo.who.int/handle/123456789/179076Purpose: To compare the outcomes of anterior chamber and retropupillary implantation of iris‑claw Artisan intraocular lenses (IOL). Design: Prospective, randomized, single‑blinded study. Patients and Methods: Forty eyes of forty aphakic patients were enrolled. Patients were randomized into two groups. Each group includes twenty patients. Group 1 received anterior chamber Artisan IOL implantation. Group 2 received retropupillary Artisan IOL implantation. Preoperative and postoperative corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), and all complications were noted and compared at 6 months follow‑up. Results: Each two groups obtained a significant improvement in CDVA (P < 0.05). Four patients in Group 1 and five patients in Group 2 had significant but nonpermanent increase at IOP values. There were one and two pupillary irregularity in Group 1 and Group 2, respectively. In one patient, a shallow and inferior located retinal detachment were encountered in anterior chamber group. Conclusions: The results were not significantly different between the two fixation techniques for iris‑claw lens. The surgery procedure is dependent to surgeon experience and eye’s conditions.enAphakiaArtisan lensretropupillary implantationArticle