Literature DB >> 19333692

All-distance visual acuity in eyes with a nontinted or a yellow-tinted diffractive multifocal intraocular lens.

Ken Hayashi1,2, Miki Masumoto3, Hideyuki Hayashi4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare all-distance visual acuity (VA) between eyes with a nontinted diffractive multifocal intraocular lens (IOL), a yellow-tinted multifocal IOL, and a nontinted monofocal IOL.
METHODS: Thirty-four patients underwent bilateral implantation of a nontinted multifocal IOL (Alcon ReSTOR), 30 received a yellow-tinted multifocal IOL (ReSTOR Natural), and 17 a monofocal IOL. All-distance VA was measured with an all-distance vision tester at 12 months postoperatively. The relationships between pupillary diameter and IOL decentration and tilt with VA were determined.
RESULTS: Both uncorrected and best distance-corrected near VA in the multifocal groups were significantly better than those in the monofocal group, whereas no significant differences were found in far-to-intermediate VAs. There was no significant difference in all-distance VA between the nontinted and yellow-tinted multifocal groups. In the multifocal groups, a larger pupillary diameter was associated with better near VA, whereas there was no correlation between VA and IOL decentration and tilt.
CONCLUSIONS: Near VA with a diffractive multifocal IOL was better than that with a monofocal IOL, although far-to-intermediate VAs were similar. All-distance VA with the nontinted multifocal IOL was similar to that with the yellow-tinted multifocal IOL. Larger pupillary diameter was associated with better near VA with the multifocal IOL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19333692     DOI: 10.1007/s10384-008-0626-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0021-5155            Impact factor:   2.447


  36 in total

1.  Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity: AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive versus AcrySof SA60AT monofocal intraocular lenses.

Authors:  Enzo Maria Vingolo; PierLuigi Grenga; Luca Iacobelli; Roberto Grenga
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.351

2.  Visual performance of AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive IOL: a prospective comparative trial.

Authors:  Carlos E Souza; Cristina Muccioli; Eduardo S Soriano; Maria Regina Chalita; Filipi Oliveira; Lincoln L Freitas; Luci P Meire; Celina Tamaki; Rubens Belfort
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-03-20       Impact factor: 5.258

3.  Contrast sensitivity after implantation of diffractive bifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses.

Authors:  E Haaskjold; E D Allen; R L Burton; S K Webber; K U Sandvig; H Jyrkkiö; E Leite; A Liekfeld; B Philipson; A Nyström; J Wollensak
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 3.351

4.  A prospective evaluation of a diffractive versus a refractive designed multifocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  T Walkow; A Liekfeld; N Anders; D T Pham; C Hartmann; J Wollensak
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 12.079

5.  A prospective, randomized, double-masked comparison of a zonal-progressive multifocal intraocular lens and a monofocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  R F Steinert; C T Post; S F Brint; C D Fritch; D L Hall; L W Wilder; I H Fine; S B Lichtenstein; S Masket; C Casebeer
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 12.079

6.  Contrast sensitivity and depth of focus with aspheric multifocal versus conventional monofocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  S Dadeya; S Kaushik
Journal:  Can J Ophthalmol       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 1.882

7.  Reading ability with 3 multifocal intraocular lens models.

Authors:  Werner W Hütz; H Berthold Eckhardt; Bern Röhrig; Roman Grolmus
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.351

8.  Food and Drug Administration study update. One-year results from 671 patients with the 3M multifocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  R L Lindstrom
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 12.079

9.  Comparison of depth of focus and low-contrast acuities for monofocal versus multifocal intraocular lens patients at 1 year.

Authors:  C T Post
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 12.079

10.  Visual performance with multifocal intraocular lenses: mesopic contrast sensitivity under distance and near conditions.

Authors:  Robert Montés-Micó; Enrique España; Inmaculada Bueno; W Neil Charman; José L Menezo
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 12.079

View more
  5 in total

1.  Five-year postoperative outcomes of apodized diffractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation.

Authors:  Mami Yoshino; Hiroko Bissen-Miyajima; Keiichiro Minami; Yoko Taira
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-09-28       Impact factor: 2.447

2.  Comparison of visual outcomes between bilateral trifocal intraocular lenses and combined bifocal intraocular lenses with different near addition.

Authors:  Ken Hayashi; Tatsuhiko Sato; Chizuka Igarashi; Motoaki Yoshida
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 2.447

3.  [Functional results with two multifocal intraocular lenses with different near addition].

Authors:  U Mester; B Junker; H Kaymak
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 1.059

Review 4.  Multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses after cataract extraction.

Authors:  Samantha R de Silva; Jennifer R Evans; Varo Kirthi; Mohammed Ziaei; Martin Leyland
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-12-12

Review 5.  Blue-light filtering intraocular lenses (IOLs) for protecting macular health.

Authors:  Laura E Downie; Ljoudmila Busija; Peter R Keller
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-05-22
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.