Literature DB >> 16531421

Subjective and objective performance of the Lenstec KH-3500 "accommodative" intraocular lens.

J S Wolffsohn1, S A Naroo, N K Motwani, S Shah, O A Hunt, S Mantry, M Sira, I A Cunliffe, M T Benson.   

Abstract

AIM: To determine whether eyes implanted with the Lenstec KH-3500 "accommodative" intraocular lenses (IOLs) have improved subjective and objective focusing performance compared to a standard monofocal IOLs.
METHODS: 28 participants were implanted monocularly with a KH-3500 "accommodative" IOL and 20 controls with a Softec1 IOL. Outcome measures of refraction, visual acuity, subjective amplitude of accommodation, objective accommodative stimulus response curve, aberrometry, and Scheimpflug imaging were taken at approximately 3 weeks and repeated after 6 months.
RESULTS: Best corrected acuity with the KH-3500 was 0.06 (SD 0.13) logMAR at distance and 0.58 (0.20) logMAR at near. Accommodation was 0.39 (0.53) D measured objectively and 3.1 (1.6) D subjectively. Higher order aberrations were 0.87 (0.85) microm and lower order were 0.24 (0.39) microm. Posterior subcapsular light scatter was 0.95% (1.37%) greater than IOL clarity. In comparison, all control group measures were similar except objective (0.17 (0.13) D; p = 0.032) and subjective (2.0 (0.9) D; p = 0.009) amplitude of accommodation. Six months following surgery, posterior subcapsular scatter had increased (p<0.01) in the KH-3500 implanted subjects and near word acuity had decreased (p<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The objective accommodating effects of the KH-3500 IOL appear to be limited, although the subjective and objective accommodative range is significantly increased compared to control subjects implanted with conventional IOLs. However, this "accommodative" ability of the lens appears to have decreased by 6 months post-surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16531421      PMCID: PMC1860198          DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2006.090951

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0007-1161            Impact factor:   4.638


  18 in total

1.  Clinical evaluation of the Shin-Nippon SRW-5000 autorefractor in adults.

Authors:  E A Mallen; J S Wolffsohn; B Gilmartin; S Tsujimura
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  [Miyake-Apple video analysis of movement patterns of an accommodative intraocular lens implant].

Authors:  G U Auffarth; J Schmidbauer; K A Becker; T M Rabsilber; D J Apple
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 1.059

3.  Apparent accommodation in pseudophakic eyes.

Authors:  G Ravalico; F Baccara
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh)       Date:  1990-10

4.  Intraocular lens movement caused by ciliary muscle contraction.

Authors:  Oliver Findl; Barbara Kiss; Vanessa Petternel; Rupert Menapace; Michael Georgopoulos; Georg Rainer; Wolfgang Drexler
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.351

5.  Relationship between apparent accomodation and corneal multifocality in pseudophakic eyes.

Authors:  M Fukuyama; T Oshika; S Amano; F Yoshitomi
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 12.079

6.  [Dynamic aberrometry during accommodation of phakic eyes and eyes with potentially accommodative intraocular lenses].

Authors:  H B Dick; St Kaiser
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 1.059

7.  Contrast sensitivity and glare disability by halogen light after monofocal and multifocal lens implantation.

Authors:  S Schmitz; H B Dick; F Krummenauer; O Schwenn; R Krist
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.638

8.  Stimulus-driven versus pilocarpine-induced biometric changes in pseudophakic eyes.

Authors:  K Kriechbaum; O Findl; C Koeppl; R Menapace; W Drexler
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 12.079

9.  Cardinal points and image-object magnification with an accommodative lens implant (1 CU).

Authors:  Achim Langenbucher; Stefan Huber; Nhung X Nguyen; Berthold Seitz; Michael Küchle
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.117

10.  Implantation of a new accommodative posterior chamber intraocular lens.

Authors:  Michael Küchle; Nhung X Nguyen; Achim Langenbucher; Gabriele C Gusek-Schneider; Berthold Seitz; Khalil D Hanna
Journal:  J Refract Surg       Date:  2002 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.573

View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  Restoration of accommodation: surgical options for correction of presbyopia.

Authors:  Adrian Glasser
Journal:  Clin Exp Optom       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 2.742

2.  Objective accommodation measurements in prepresbyopic eyes using an autorefractor and an aberrometer.

Authors:  Dorothy M Win-Hall; Adrian Glasser
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 3.351

3.  Age-related changes in the anterior segment biometry during accommodation.

Authors:  Yilei Shao; Aizhu Tao; Hong Jiang; Xinjie Mao; Jianguang Zhong; Meixiao Shen; Fan Lu; Zhe Xu; Carol L Karp; Jianhua Wang
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 4.799

4.  Visual performance with accommodating and multifocal intraocular lenses.

Authors:  Jie Lan; Yu-Sen Huang; Yun-Hai Dai; Xiao-Ming Wu; Jia-Jun Sun; Li-Xin Xie
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-02-18       Impact factor: 1.779

Review 5.  Clinical application of accommodating intraocular lens.

Authors:  You-Ling Liang; Song-Bai Jia
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-06-18       Impact factor: 1.779

6.  Subjective and objective depth of field measures in pseudophakic eyes: comparison between extended depth of focus, trifocal and bifocal intraocular lenses.

Authors:  Carlos Palomino-Bautista; Rubén Sánchez-Jean; David Carmona-González; David P Piñero; Ainhoa Molina-Martín
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-10-03       Impact factor: 2.031

7.  Static and dynamic accommodation measured using the WAM-5500 Autorefractor.

Authors:  Dorothy M Win-Hall; Jamie Houser; Adrian Glasser
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.973

8.  Objective accommodation measurements in pseudophakic subjects using an autorefractor and an aberrometer.

Authors:  Dorothy M Win-Hall; Adrian Glasser
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.351

9.  Positional accommodative intraocular lens power error induced by the estimation of the corneal power and the effective lens position.

Authors:  David P Piñero; Vicente J Camps; MarIa L Ramón; Verónica Mateo; Rafael J Pérez-CambrodI
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 1.848

10.  Diffractive multifocal intraocular lens compared to pseudo-accommodative intraocular lens implant for unilateral cataracts in pre-presbyopic patients.

Authors:  Rajesh Subhash Joshi
Journal:  Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol       Date:  2013 Jul-Sep
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.