期刊文献+

Visual performance with accommodating and multifocal intraocular lenses 被引量:2

Visual performance with accommodating and multifocal intraocular lenses
下载PDF
导出
摘要 AIM: To compare the visual functional outcomes with accommodating and multifocal intraocular lenses(IOLs).METHODS: Our retrospective comparative study included 51 patients(60 eyes) received implantation of an accommodating IOL(Tetraflex;16 patients,20 eyes),a refractive multifocal IOL(Re Zoom;18 patients,20 eyes),or a diffractive multifocal IOL(ZMA00;17 patients,20 eyes).Subjective refraction,visual acuity,contrast sensitivity(CS),intraocular aberration,and subjective photic phenomena were detected at 3mo after surgery.RESULTS: The spherical equivalent in the three groups was-0.38±0.54 D,0.14±0.56 D,and 0.35±0.41 D,respectively.No statistically significant differences were found in uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity and uncorrected intermediate visual acuity among the groups(P=0.39).The Re Zoom group had significantly better distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity than the ZMA00 group(P=0.003).The ZMA00 group had significantly better near visual acuity than the other groups(P〈0.05).Better contrast sensitivity values were observed in the Tetraflex group under most of the spatial frequencies conditions(P=0.025).The total aberration was lowest in the ZMA00 group(P=0.000),and the spherical aberration was highest in the Tetraflex group(P=0.000).The three groups had similar frequency of ghosting and glare,and the Tetraflex group had a low rate of halos(P=0.01).CONCLUSION: Both accommodating and multifocal IOLs can successfully restore distance and uncorrected intermediate visual acuities.Tetraflex accommodating IOLs perform better in CS and with less halos of photic phenomena.Re Zoom refractive multifocal IOLs havebetter performance in distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity than ZMA00 diffractive multifocal IOLs,and the latter achieved better near visual acuity and efficiently decreased the optical aberration. AIM: To compare the visual functional outcomes with accommodating and multifocal intraocular lenses(IOLs).METHODS: Our retrospective comparative study included 51 patients(60 eyes) received implantation of an accommodating IOL(Tetraflex;16 patients,20 eyes),a refractive multifocal IOL(Re Zoom;18 patients,20 eyes),or a diffractive multifocal IOL(ZMA00;17 patients,20 eyes).Subjective refraction,visual acuity,contrast sensitivity(CS),intraocular aberration,and subjective photic phenomena were detected at 3mo after surgery.RESULTS: The spherical equivalent in the three groups was-0.38±0.54 D,0.14±0.56 D,and 0.35±0.41 D,respectively.No statistically significant differences were found in uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity and uncorrected intermediate visual acuity among the groups(P=0.39).The Re Zoom group had significantly better distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity than the ZMA00 group(P=0.003).The ZMA00 group had significantly better near visual acuity than the other groups(P〈0.05).Better contrast sensitivity values were observed in the Tetraflex group under most of the spatial frequencies conditions(P=0.025).The total aberration was lowest in the ZMA00 group(P=0.000),and the spherical aberration was highest in the Tetraflex group(P=0.000).The three groups had similar frequency of ghosting and glare,and the Tetraflex group had a low rate of halos(P=0.01).CONCLUSION: Both accommodating and multifocal IOLs can successfully restore distance and uncorrected intermediate visual acuities.Tetraflex accommodating IOLs perform better in CS and with less halos of photic phenomena.Re Zoom refractive multifocal IOLs havebetter performance in distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity than ZMA00 diffractive multifocal IOLs,and the latter achieved better near visual acuity and efficiently decreased the optical aberration.
出处 《International Journal of Ophthalmology(English edition)》 SCIE CAS 2017年第2期235-240,共6页 国际眼科杂志(英文版)
基金 Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China(No.81600721) the Key Laboratory Program of Shandong Eye Institute(NO.2014-1) Medicine Science and Technology Development Program of Shandong Province(No.2015WS0204) the Science and Technology plan of Qingdao,China(No.15-9-1-35-jch) the Innovation Project of Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences
关键词 intraocular lens accommodating MULTIFOCAL visual performance intraocular lens accommodating multifocal visual performance
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献34

  • 1亢晓丽,王浩,李若溪,郭秀荣,乔光,张洪,王丽杰.折叠式人工晶状体植入术后术眼伪调节力的临床观察[J].中华眼科杂志,2004,40(8):557-558. 被引量:9
  • 2童颖,张丰菊,张洪沛.不同年龄组植入预留屈光度数人工晶体眼术后伪调节力的比较[J].中国实用眼科杂志,2005,23(5):519-523. 被引量:7
  • 3王海林,张洋,关家秀,凡长春.后房型人工晶体植入眼的伪调节[J].中华眼科杂志,1996,32(4):291-294. 被引量:15
  • 4徐广第.眼科屈光学.4版.北京:军事医学科学出版社,2005:95.
  • 5Vingolo EM, Grenga P, Lacobeli L, et al. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity: AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive versus AcrySof SA60AT monofocal intraocular lenses. Cataract Refract Surg,2007,33 : 1244-1247.
  • 6Mesci C, Erbil HH, Olgun A, et al. Visual performances with monofocal, accommodating, and multifocal intraocular lenses in patients with unilateral cataract. Am J Ophthalmol, 2010, 150: 609-618.
  • 7Marchini G, Pedrotti E, Modesti M, et al. Anterior segment changes during accommodation in eyes with a monofocal intraocular lens: high-frequency ultrasound study. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2008, 34:949-956.
  • 8Park KA,Yun JH, Kee C. The effect of cataract extraction on the contractility of ciliary muscle. Am J Ophthalmol,2008 ,146 :8-14.
  • 9Bettman JW. Apparent accommodation in aphakic eyes. Am J Ophthalmol, 1950,33:921-928.
  • 10Sugitani Y, Komori T, Katoh R, et al. Apparent accommodation (pseudoaccommodation) on pseudophakia. Floia Ophthalmol Jpn, 1979,30:326-332.

共引文献13

同被引文献4

引证文献2

二级引证文献8

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部