Presented at the ASCRS Congress, San Francisco, USA, April, 2003. Hydrophilic (Rayner Centerflex) versus Hydrophobic (Acrysof SA30AL) Single-piece, Acrylic, Foldable IOLs: 1-Year Results Claudette Abela-Formanek, Michael Amon, Gebtraub Schild, Jörg Schauersberger, Gustav Bartl, Andreas Kruger Vienna, Austria Purpose: To compare the clinical performance of 2 foldable, one-piece intraocular lenses IOLs made of hydrophilic or hydrophobic acrylic material in terms of uveal and capsular biocompatibility. Method: 60 eyes were prospectively selected to receive a hydrophilic Rayner Centerflex, or a hydrophobic acrylic Alcon SA30 AL IOL. One year after cataract surgery 51 eyes were assessed by measuring flare using a laser flare-cell meter KOWA FC 1000 and specular microscopy of the anterior IOL surface. Anterior and posterior capsule opacification was assessed semi-quantitatively by means of biomicroscopy. Cataract surgery, postoperative medication and follow-up were standardised. Results: There was no significant difference in the postoperative flare values at one year. The mild foreign-body reaction giant cells and epithelioid cells on the AcySof IOL 19% was statistically significant when compared to the Centerflex 0%. None of the IOLs showed lens epithelial cell outgrowth on the anterior IOL surface. Anterior capsule opacification ACO was more intensive in the AcrySof group p=0.001. Posterior capsule opacification PCO was mild in the Centerflex group as opposed to no PCO in the AcrySof group p=0.0001. Conclusion: Both IOL types showed good clinical results one year after surgery. The Rayner Centerflex showed no cellular reaction 1 year postoperatively as opposed to the increased giant cell counts on the hydrophobic acrylic lenses. A more intensive ACO was accompanied by a better PCO result in the AcrySof group.