PURPOSE: To evaluate distance contrast sensitivity under photopic, mesopic, and mesopic with glare conditions after implantation of the AcrySof ReSTOR (Alcon Laboratories Inc) and Acri.LISA (Carl Zeiss Meditec) intraocular lenses (IOLs). METHODS: Binocular contrast sensitivity function was measured with the Optec 6500 FACT contrast sensitivity chart at distance and at three lighting conditions (85 cd/m2 and 3 cd/m2 with and without glare) in 36 eyes of 18 patients implanted with the AcrySof ReSTOR aspheric SN6AD3 IOL and 40 eyes of 20 patients implanted with the Acri.LISA 366D IOL. Results after implantation were compared between lenses at 1 and 6 months. RESULTS: Our results revealed that both IOLs provided good best spectacle-corrected visual acuities at distance and near vision (approximately 20/20), and no statistically significant differences were noted between models at different time points after surgery. Both IOLs provided contrast sensitivity within the normal range in photopic conditions. Under low lighting conditions, a reduction in contrast sensitivity for both lenses, particularly at higher spatial frequencies, was noted. No significant differences were observed between both IOLs at any lighting condition. CONCLUSIONS: The AcrySof ReSTOR SN6AD3 and Acri.LISA aspheric IOLs provided contrast sensitivity within normal range under photopic conditions and a reduction in contrast sensitivity under mesopic conditions, with no significant differences between the two brands.
PURPOSE: To evaluate distance contrast sensitivity under photopic, mesopic, and mesopic with glare conditions after implantation of the AcrySof ReSTOR (Alcon Laboratories Inc) and Acri.LISA (Carl Zeiss Meditec) intraocular lenses (IOLs). METHODS: Binocular contrast sensitivity function was measured with the Optec 6500 FACT contrast sensitivity chart at distance and at three lighting conditions (85 cd/m2 and 3 cd/m2 with and without glare) in 36 eyes of 18 patients implanted with the AcrySof ReSTOR aspheric SN6AD3 IOL and 40 eyes of 20 patients implanted with the Acri.LISA 366D IOL. Results after implantation were compared between lenses at 1 and 6 months. RESULTS: Our results revealed that both IOLs provided good best spectacle-corrected visual acuities at distance and near vision (approximately 20/20), and no statistically significant differences were noted between models at different time points after surgery. Both IOLs provided contrast sensitivity within the normal range in photopic conditions. Under low lighting conditions, a reduction in contrast sensitivity for both lenses, particularly at higher spatial frequencies, was noted. No significant differences were observed between both IOLs at any lighting condition. CONCLUSIONS: The AcrySof ReSTOR SN6AD3 and Acri.LISA aspheric IOLs provided contrast sensitivity within normal range under photopic conditions and a reduction in contrast sensitivity under mesopic conditions, with no significant differences between the two brands.