Buscar en
Revista Mexicana de Oftalmología
Toda la web
Inicio Revista Mexicana de Oftalmología What is the best surgical approach for ectopia lentis in Marfan syndrome?
Información de la revista
Vol. 89. Núm. 4.
Páginas 237-240 (Octubre - Diciembre 2015)
Descargar PDF
Más opciones de artículo
Vol. 89. Núm. 4.
Páginas 237-240 (Octubre - Diciembre 2015)
Review Article
DOI: 10.1016/j.mexoft.2015.05.015
Open Access
What is the best surgical approach for ectopia lentis in Marfan syndrome?
¿Cual es el mejor manejo quirúgico de ectopia lentis en síndrome de Marfan?
Sergio Groman-Lupaa,b,
Autor para correspondencia

Corresponding author at: Rocky Mountains Lions Eye Institute, University of Colorado School of Medicine, 1675 Aurora Court, Aurora, CO 80045, USA.
, Daniela Santos-Cantúa,b, Hugo Quiroz-Mercadoa,b
a Denver Health Medical Center, 777 Bannock Street, Denver, CO, USA
b Rocky Mountain Lions Eye Institute, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA
Información del artículo
Texto completo
Descargar PDF

The surgical management of ectopia lentis (EL) in Marfan syndrome (MFS) represents a challenge to the ophthalmologist. We reviewed the literature on the surgical management of ectopia lentis in MFS patients from the classical pars plana lensectomy (PPL) to the most innovative scleral- and iris-fixated intraocular lens (IOL) surgical techniques. The results with the innovative approaches have been satisfactory but with a relatively short follow-up period and several complications associated, and the need of a highly experienced and skilled surgeon. We suggest that PPL approach with postsurgical aphakia is the safest surgical approach to ectopia lentis in MFS on a routinely basis.

Marfan syndrome
Ectopia lentis
Surgical management
Pars plana vitrectomy
Intraocular lens

El manejo quirúrgico de ectopia lentis en Síndrome de Marfan representa un reto para el oftalmólogo. Realizamos una revisión de la literatura sobre el tratamiento quirúrgico de ectopia lentis en pacientes con Síndrome de Marfan incluyendo el manejo clásico con lensectomía pars plana y afaquia postquirúrgica así como como el uso de lentes intraoculares fijados a iris o esclera. Los resultados con estos últimos han sido satisfactorios, pero con un periodo de seguimiento corto y diferentes complicaciones, además de que requieren de un cirujano con gran experiencia. Sugerimos que lensectomia pars plana es el abordaje quirúrgico más seguro de ectopia lentis en Síndrome de Marfan en la práctica diaria.

Palabras clave:
Síndrome de Marfan
Ectopia lentis
Manejo quirúrgico
Vitrectomia pars plana
Lente intraocular
Texto completo

Marfan syndrome (MFS) is a connective tissue inherited disease associated with a decreased life expectancy.1–4 It has and incidence of 2–3 per 10,000 individuals with no sex predilection.1 It was first described by Antoine-Bernard Marfan in 1896.1 It is caused by a mutation in FBN1 (15q21.1) gene and is inherited in an autosomal dominant fashion.2,4 This gene is involved in the production of the extracellular matrixprotein fibrillin, an essential glycoprotein for the formation of elastic fibers in connective tissue. It affects the ocular, skeletal and cardiovascular systems with great clinical variability.5–7 Aortic dilatation and dissection are the most important and life threatening manifestations.8,9 The diagnosis is based on clinical findings according to the revised Ghent nosology criteria that includes EL as one of its major criteria.10,11 Ocular involvement in MFS is very common (>50%) and places a high burden on patients quality of life.10–13 Although EL is the most common ocular manifestation, other ocular abnormalities can be found such as flat cornea, increased axial length (>3D), hypoplasia of the ciliary muscle or the iris, retinal detachment, cataracts, glaucoma, strabismus, and amblyopia.14–20

A stepwise approach is recommended for the management of EL. At first, when the visual axis is not compromised by the border of the dislocated lens causing diplopia or visual distortion, a conservatory management with optical refraction is preferable. However, surgical intervention is indicated when a functional best corrected visual acuity is not achieved, the refractive status is unstable because of lens mobility or posterior dislocation, or if anterior dislocation causes secondary ocular hypertension and risk of glaucomatous damage and/or risk of endothelial compromise.20–22

The surgical management of EL in MFS represents a challenge to the ophthalmologist. Fibrillin microfibrils are disrupted and fragmented in the lens capsule, iris and sclera, making the eye more susceptible to surgical complications.23,24 For many years the preferable surgical approach to manage the dislocated lens in these patients has been standard lensectomy with or without anterior vitrectomy as well as pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) and lensectomy (PPL) with postoperative refractive correction including the use of aphakic glasses or contact lenses. With the advent of small-incision cataract surgery and better IOLs and capsular tension ring and segments, techniques and approaches for EL have evolved and various scleral- and iris-fixated surgical techniques have been proposed. However, the average patient follow-up in the majority of these published articles is 1 year and several complications using these proposed techniques have been found, including pupillary block, iris capture, lens decentration, and retinal detachment with fixation to the iris and/or sclera.25–30

We considered a classical surgical approach to manage ectopia lentis in MFS when a lensectomy is performed either through pars plana (PPV) or through a limbal approach with postoperative aphakia. Follow-up for these studies range from 1.5 to 102 months, with low incidence of complications.31–39

In the pars plana approach a standard vitrectomy technique is used. A 20G or 23G vitrectomy caliber can be used depending on surgeon's preference. The vitrector is used to engage the lens from a posterior approach removing the nuclear material utilizing the endoilluminator as a second instrument from the opposite port to stabilize the lens. In the limbal approach, as described by Plager38 and Neely,36 a peripheral corneal stab incision is made for an infusion cannula to maintain the anterior chamber throughout the procedure. A second anterior limbal incision is created with a MVR for the vitrector insertion. The MVR blade is advanced through the cornea to penetrate the peripheral anterior lens capsule creating 2–3mm slit. The capsulorhexis can also be created using the vitrector which is then utilized to aspirate the lens followed by removal of most of the posterior and anterior capsule and a limited anterior vitrectomy.40 These techniques minimize pulling forces and trauma to the zonules and iris and the vitreous base.

Capsular tension rings (CTRs) have provided the opportunity to perform small-incision phacoemulsification and in-the-bag implantation of a posterior chamber IOL (PCIOL). A capsular tension ring functions by exerting a centrifugal force at the capsular equator, expanding the capsular bag and redistributing tension from the weakened zonules to stronger, intact zonules.40 However, the capsular tension ring cannot provide adequate support or correct decentration of the capsular bag in the presence of extensive zonular dialysis.41 In 1998, the Cionni modified capsular tension ring (Morcher, FCI Ophthalmics, Marshfield Hills, MA, USA) was introduced to help manage profound zonular weakness.42,43 The Cionni modified capsular tension ring can be fixated to the sclera without compromising capsular bag integrity with 1 or 2 sutures. In 2002, Ahmed designed the capsular tension segment (Morcher, FCI Ophthalmics, Marshfield Hills, MA, USA), of 120 degrees; it has an anteriorly positioned eyelet, which enables scleral suture fixation. Compared to the Cionni modified capsular tension ring, the capsular tension segment can be inserted into the capsule bag with greater ease and less trauma because a dialing technique is not necessary.40 Bahar reported a series of intraoperative limitations difficulties using the Cionni ring during the creation of a central capsulorhexis in an unstable lens as well as during the implantation of the cionni ring with extensive subluxation, as it may be too large for the capsular bag, increasing the risk of a bag tear.44

Another option is an iris-fixated IOL. The iris-fixated IOL could be implanted in the posterior or the anterior chamber. Briefly, in the iris-fixated PCIOL a three-piece foldable PCIOLs is inserted with the haptics placed under the iris and the optic captured in the pupil. The haptics are sutured to the iris with a curved needle, as previously described.28,45 For the iris-claw, the anterior chamber IOL (ACIOL) is introduced with the haptics at 3 and 9 o’clock centered on the pupil and an enclavation needle is used to fixate the IOL at the iris midperiphery.28,46,47 The incidence of complications reported varies within the series. In a series of cases reported by Hirashima,28 33.3% of the patients treated with ACIOL developed iris atrophy at the enclavation site, and among the patients treated with PCIOL, 31.25% developed iris atrophy, 12.5% had a retinal detachment and 18.7% had IOL decentration. These complications were reported with a follow up of only 12 months. Also, the ACIOL may accelerate the endothelial cell count lose and potentially lead to bullous keratopathy.48–50 Another concern when utilizing an ACIOL is the potential damage to the trabecular meshwork in an already predisposed glaucoma patient.51,52

Lastly, different alternatives have been presented for placement of scleral-sutured PC lenses. They can be sutured from the inside out (ab interno) or by passing the needles from the outside of the eye inward (ab externo), however scleral-fixated IOLs have been associated with several complications such as retinal detachment and late suture breakage.53

Given the fibrillin deficiency in the iris and sclera as well as anatomical eye abnormalities in Marfan syndrome, extreme precaution is advised with IOL implantation and scleral fixation. The scleral and iris fixated IOL techniques are very skill demanding and time consuming and they need to be performed by a very experienced surgeon. Also, long-term prospective or randomized studies are needed to determine the efficacy of ACIOL in Marfan syndrome. With these questions remaining unanswered, and the potential complications related to surgical stress to zonules, iris, and the vitreous base we conclude that the classical PPV or PPL approach with postsurgical aphakia is the safest surgical approach to ectopia lentis in MFS with postoperative correction with contact lenses or glasses.

Conflict of interest

None of the authors have conflict of interest to disclose.

D.P. Judge, H.C. Dietz.
Marfan's syndrome.
Lancet, 366 (2005), pp. 1965-1976
H.C. Dietz, G.R. Cutting, R.E. Pyeritz, et al.
Marfan syndrome caused by a recurrent de novo missense mutation in the fibrillin gene.
Nature, 352 (1991), pp. 337-339
M.A. Sadiq, D. Vanderveen.
Genetics of ectopia lentis.
Semin Ophthalmol, 28 (2013), pp. 313-320
H.C. Dietz, R.E. Pyeritz, B.D. Hall, et al.
The Marfan syndrome locus: confirmation of assignment to chromosome 15 and identification of tightly linked markers at 15q15-q21.3.
Genomics, 9 (1991), pp. 355-361
D.W.7 Hollister, M. Godfrey, L.Y. Sakai, et al.
Immunohistologic abnormalities of the microfibrillar-fiber system in the Marfan syndrome.
N Engl J Med, 323 (1990), pp. 152-159
L.Y. Sakai, D.R. Keene, E. Engvall.
Fibrillin, a new 350-kD glycoprotein, is a component of extracellular microfibrils.
J Cell Biol, 103 (1986), pp. 2499-2509
R.M. Radke, H. Baumgartner.
Diagnosis and treatment of Marfan syndrome: an update.
Heart, 100 (2014), pp. 1382-1391
F. Romaniello, D. Mazzaglia, A. Pellegrino, et al.
Aortopathy in Marfan syndrome: an update.
Cardiovasc Pathol, 23 (2014), pp. 261-266
T. Treasure, J.J. Takkenberg, J. Pepper.
Surgical management of aortic root disease in Marfan syndrome and other congenital disorders associated with aortic root aneurysms.
Heart, (2014),
T. Radonic, P. de Witte, M. Groenink, et al.
Critical appraisal of the revised Ghent criteria for diagnosis of Marfan syndrome.
Clin Genet, 80 (2011), pp. 346-353
A. Chandra, D. Patel, J.A. Aragon-Martin, et al.
The revised ghent nosology; reclassifying isolated ectopia lentis.
Clin Genet, (2014),
N.W. Hindle, J.S. Crawford.
Dislocation of the lens in Marfan's syndrome. Its effect and treatment.
Can J Ophthalmol, 4 (1969), pp. 128-135
N. Zadeh, J.A. Bernstein, A.K. Niemi, et al.
Ectopia lentis as the presenting and primary feature in Marfan syndrome.
Am J Med Genet A, 155a (2011), pp. 2661-2668
H.E. Cross, A.D. Jensen.
Ocular manifestations in the Marfan syndrome and homocystinuria.
Am J Ophthalmol, 75 (1973), pp. 405-420
T.R. Konradsen, C. Zetterstrom.
A descriptive study of ocular characteristics in Marfan syndrome.
Acta Ophthalmol, 91 (2013), pp. 751-755
N.J. Izquierdo, E.I. Traboulsi, C. Enger, et al.
Strabismus in the Marfan syndrome.
Am J Ophthalmol, 117 (1994), pp. 632-635
T.D. France, J.W. Frank.
The association of strabismus and aphakia in children.
J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus, 21 (1984), pp. 223-226
P.E. Romano, N.C. Kerr, G.M. Hope.
Bilateral ametropic functional amblyopia in genetic ectopia lentis: its relation to the amount of subluxation, an indicator for early surgical management.
Binocul Vis Strabismus Q, 17 (2002), pp. 235-241
A. Loewenstein, I.S. Barequet, E. De Juan Jr., et al.
Retinal detachment in Marfan syndrome.
Retina, 20 (2000), pp. 358-363
I.H. Maumenee.
The eye in the Marfan syndrome.
Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc, 79 (1981), pp. 684-733
R.P. Sah, N. Paudel, J.B. Shrestha.
Marfan's syndrome: a refractive challenge for optometrists.
Clin Exp Optom, 96 (2013), pp. 581-583
R.S. Hoffman, M.E. Snyder, U. Devgan, et al.
Management of the subluxated crystalline lens.
J Cataract Refract Surg, 39 (2013), pp. 1904-1915
E.I. Traboulsi, J.A. Whittum-Hudson, S.H. Mir, et al.
Microfibril abnormalities of the lens capsule in patients with Marfan syndrome and ectopia lentis.
Ophthalmic Genet, 21 (2000), pp. 9-15
H.M. Wheatley, E.I. Traboulsi, B.E. Flowers, et al.
Immunohistochemical localization of fibrillin in human ocular tissues. Relevance to the Marfan syndrome.
Arch Ophthalmol, 113 (1995), pp. 103-109
D.S. Siganos, C.S. Siganos, C.N. Popescu, et al.
Clear lens extraction and intraocular lens implantation in Marfan's syndrome.
J Cataract Refract Surg, 26 (2000), pp. 781-784
F. Fan, Y. Luo, X. Liu, et al.
Risk factors for postoperative complications in lensectomy-vitrectomy with or without intraocular lens placement in ectopia lentis associated with Marfan syndrome.
Br J Ophthalmol, 98 (2014), pp. 1338-1342
D. Zheng, P. Wan, J. Liang, et al.
Comparison of clinical outcomes between iris-fixated anterior chamber intraocular lenses and scleral-fixated posterior chamber intraocular lenses in Marfan syndrome with lens subluxation.
Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 40 (2012), pp. 268-274
D.E. Hirashima, E.S. Soriano, R.L. Meirelles, et al.
Outcomes of iris-claw anterior chamber versus iris-fixated foldable intraocular lens in subluxated lens secondary to Marfan syndrome.
Ophthalmology, 117 (2010), pp. 1479-1485
M. Aspiotis, I. Asproudis, M. Stefaniotou, et al.
Artisan aphakic intraocular lens implantation in cases of subluxated crystalline lenses due to Marfan syndrome.
J Refract Surg, 22 (2006), pp. 99-101
Y.Y. Tsai, S.H. Tseng.
Transscleral fixation of foldable intraocular lens after pars plana lensectomy in eyes with a subluxated lens.
J Cataract Refract Surg, 25 (1999), pp. 722-724
W.Y. Wu-Chen, R.D. Letson, C.G. Summers.
Functional and structural outcomes following lensectomy for ectopia lentis.
R. Sinha, N. Sharma, R.B. Vajpayee.
Intralenticular bimanual irrigation: aspiration for subluxated lens in Marfan's syndrome.
J Cataract Refract Surg, 31 (2005), pp. 1283-1286
I. Anteby, M. Isaac, D. BenEzra.
Hereditary subluxated lenses: visual performances and long-term follow-up after surgery.
Ophthalmology, 110 (2003), pp. 1344-1348
M. Halpert, D. BenEzra.
Surgery of the hereditary subluxated lens in children.
Ophthalmology, 103 (1996), pp. 681-686
N. Babu, P. Muraly, K. Ramasamy.
Twenty-three-gauge two-port pars plana lensectomy for the management of ectopia lentis in children.
D.E. Neely, D.A. Plager.
Management of ectopia lentis in children.
Ophthalmol Clin N Am, 14 (2001), pp. 493-499
R. Behki, L.P. Noel, W.N. Clarke.
Limbal lensectomy in the management of ectopia lentis in children.
Arch Ophthalmol, 108 (1990), pp. 809-811
D.A. Plager, M.M. Parks, E.M. Helveston, et al.
Surgical treatment of subluxated lenses in children.
Ophthalmology, 99 (1992), pp. 1018-1021
Y.S. Yu, Y.H. Kang, K.H. Lim.
Improvements in visual acuity following limbal lensectomy for subluxated lenses in children.
Ophthalmic Surg Lasers, 28 (1997), pp. 1006-1010
K. Hasanee, I.I. Ahmed.
Capsular tension rings: update on endocapsular support devices.
Ophthalmol Clin N Am, 19 (2006), pp. 507-519
T.S. Dietlein, P.C. Jacobi, W. Konen, et al.
Complications of endocapsular tension ring implantation in a child with Marfan's syndrome.
J Cataract Refract Surg, 26 (2000), pp. 937-940
R.J. Cionni, R.H. Osher.
Endocapsular ring approach to the subluxed cataractous lens.
J Cataract Refract Surg, 21 (1995), pp. 245-249
R.J. Cionni, R.H. Osher.
Management of profound zonular dialysis or weakness with a new endocapsular ring designed for scleral fixation.
J Cataract Refract Surg, 24 (1998), pp. 1299-1306
I. Bahar, I. Kaiserman, D. Rootman.
Cionni endocapsular ring implantation in Marfan's syndrome.
Br J Ophthalmol, 91 (2007), pp. 1477-1480
K.G. Yen, A.K. Reddy, M.P. Weikert, et al.
Iris-fixated posterior chamber intraocular lenses in children.
Am J Ophthalmol, 147 (2009), pp. 121-126
H.B. Dick, A.J. Augustin.
Lens implant selection with absence of capsular support.
Curr Opin Ophthalmol, 12 (2001), pp. 47-57
S.B. Hannush.
Sutured posterior chamber intraocular lenses: indications and procedure.
Curr Opin Ophthalmol, 11 (2000), pp. 233-240
M. Ang, L. Li, D. Chua, et al.
Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty with anterior chamber intraocular lenses: complications and 3-year outcomes.
Br J Ophthalmol, 98 (2014), pp. 1028-1032
J. Gonnermann, N. Torun, M.K. Klamann, et al.
Visual outcomes and complications following posterior iris-claw aphakic intraocular lens implantation combined with penetrating keratoplasty.
Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 251 (2013), pp. 1151-1156
M. Hsu, A.J. Jorgensen, M. Moshirfar, et al.
Management and outcomes of descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty with intraocular lens exchange, aphakia, and anterior chamber intraocular lens.
E. Milla, A. Leszczynska, A. Rey, et al.
Novel FBN1 mutation causes Marfan syndrome with bilateral ectopia lentis and refractory glaucoma.
Eur J Ophthalmol, 22 (2012), pp. 667-669
J. Kuchtey, T.C. Chang, L. Panagis, et al.
Marfan syndrome caused by a novel FBN1 mutation with associated pigmentary glaucoma.
Am J Med Genet A, 161a (2013), pp. 880-883
E.G. Buckley.
Safety of transscleral-sutured intraocular lenses in children.
Copyright © 2015. Sociedad Mexicana de Oftalmología
Opciones de artículo