Literature DB >> 18499001

Intraocular straylight after implantation of the multifocal AcrySof ReSTOR SA60D3 diffractive intraocular lens.

Niels E de Vries1, Luuk Franssen, Carroll A B Webers, Nayyirih G Tahzib, Yanny Y Y Cheng, Fred Hendrikse, Khiun F Tjia, Tom J T P van den Berg, Rudy M M A Nuijts.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To measure intraocular straylight (as a measure of glare) after cataract surgery and implantation of an AcrySof ReSTOR SA60D3 multifocal or AcrySof SA60AT monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) (both Alcon Laboratories).
SETTING: University Hospital Maastricht, Maastricht; Isala Clinics, Zwolle; Netherlands Institute for Neurosciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
METHODS: In a prospective open observational case series, a newly developed straylight meter was used to objectively measure straylight 6 months postoperatively in 66 eyes with a diffractive AcrySof ReSTOR SA60D3 IOL (multifocal group) and 40 eyes with a monofocal AcrySof SA60AT IOL (monofocal group). A comparison of straylight levels in an age-matched population without cataract (control group) was performed.
RESULTS: The straylight level was 1.20 log units +/- 0.16 (SD) in the multifocal group and 1.10 +/- 0.19 log units in the monofocal group. When the difference in mean level of straylight was adjusted for age, mean straylight levels were 0.078 log units lower in the monofocal group than in the multifocal group (P = .026). Straylight levels in both pseudophakic groups were lower than in the control group without cataract (P< .0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Levels of intraocular straylight log(s) were significantly lower for both types of IOL than in age-matched subjects from the normal population. The mean level of intraocular straylight 6 months postoperatively was higher in patients with an AcrySof ReSTOR SA60D3 IOL than in patients with a monofocal AcrySof SA60AT IOL. Implantation of the former IOL would therefore result in a smaller gain in contrast sensitivity and a smaller reduction in glare and halos than implantation of the latter IOL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18499001     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.02.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg        ISSN: 0886-3350            Impact factor:   3.351


  12 in total

1.  Retinal straylight and light distortion phenomena in normal and post-LASIK eyes.

Authors:  Alejandro Cerviño; Cesar Villa-Collar; Jose Manuel Gonzalez-Meijome; Teresa Ferrer-Blasco; Santiago García-Lázaro
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-01-18       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Contrast visual acuity after multifocal intraocular lens implantation: aspheric versus spherical design.

Authors:  Jun-Hua Li; Yi-Fan Feng; Yun-E Zhao; Yin-Ying Zhao; Lei Lin
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 1.779

3.  Intraocular lens exchange-removing the optic intact.

Authors:  Matthew Hao Lee; Diane Lesley Webster
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-06-18       Impact factor: 1.779

4.  [Influence of different multifocal intraocular lens concepts on retinal stray light parameters].

Authors:  A Ehmer; T M Rabsilber; A Mannsfeld; M J Sanchez; M P Holzer; G U Auffarth
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.059

5.  Spectacle independence and subjective satisfaction of ReSTOR multifocal intraocular lens after cataract or presbyopia surgery in two European countries.

Authors:  Béatrice Cochener; Luis Fernández-Vega; Jose F Alfonso; Frédérique Maurel; Juliette Meunier; Gilles Berdeaux
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-03-04

6.  Effect of diabetic retinopathy and diabetes on the intraocular straylight in pseudophakic eyes.

Authors:  Hyung Bin Hwang; Hye Bin Yim; Sung Kun Chung
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-10-13       Impact factor: 2.209

7.  Causes and correction of dissatisfaction after implantation of presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses.

Authors:  Allister Gibbons; Tayyeba K Ali; Daniel P Waren; Kendall E Donaldson
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-10-11

8.  Assessment of dysphotopsia in pseudophakic subjects with multifocal intraocular lenses.

Authors:  Phillip J Buckhurst; Shehzad A Naroo; Leon N Davies; Sunil Shah; Tom Drew; James S Wolffsohn
Journal:  BMJ Open Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-06-19

9.  Comparison of a hydrophilic and a hydrophobic apodized diffractive multifocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  Jan Willem van der Linden; Ivanka J van der Meulen; Maarten P Mourits; Ruth Lapid-Gortzak
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 2.031

10.  Influence of extended depth of focus intraocular lenses on visual field sensitivity.

Authors:  Makiko Takahashi; Chiemi Yamashiro; Takuya Yoshimoto; Yuka Kobayashi; Fumiaki Higashijima; Masaaki Kobayashi; Makoto Hatano; Manami Ohta; Tomohiko Nagai; Shinichiro Teranishi; Katsuyoshi Suzuki; Ryu Takabatake; Kazuhiro Kimura
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-09-14       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.