Literature DB >> 23557223

Clinical and optical intraocular performance of rotationally asymmetric multifocal IOL plate-haptic design versus C-loop haptic design.

Jorge L Alió1, Ana B Plaza-Puche, Jaime Javaloy, María José Ayala, Alfredo Vega-Estrada.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the visual and intraocular optical quality outcomes with different designs of the refractive rotationally asymmetric multifocal intraocular lens (MFIOL) (Lentis Mplus; Oculentis GmbH, Berlin, Germany) with or without capsular tension ring (CTR) implantation.
METHODS: One hundred thirty-five consecutive eyes of 78 patients with cataract (ages 36 to 82 years) were divided into three groups: 43 eyes implanted with the C-Loop haptic design without CTR (C-Loop haptic only group); 47 eyes implanted with the C-Loop haptic design with CTR (C-Loop haptic with CTR group); and 45 eyes implanted with the plate-haptic design (plate-haptic group). Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, defocus curve, and ocular and intraocular optical quality were evaluated at 3 months postoperatively.
RESULTS: Significant differences in the postoperative sphere were found (P = .01), with a more myopic postoperative refraction for the C-Loop haptic only group. No significant differences were detected in photopic and scotopic contrast sensitivity among groups (P ⩾ .05). Significantly better visual acuities were present in the C-Loop haptic with CTR group for the defocus levels of -2.0, -1.5, -1.0, and -0.50 D (P ⩽.03). Statistically significant differences among groups were found in total intraocular root mean square (RMS), high-order intraocular RMS, and intraocular coma-like RMS aberrations (P ⩽.04), with lower values from the plate-haptic group.
CONCLUSIONS: The plate-haptic design and the C-Loop haptic design with CTR implantation both allow good visual rehabilitation. However, better refractive predictability and intraocular optical quality was obtained with the plate-haptic design without CTR implantation. The plate-haptic design seems to be a better design to support rotational asymmetric MFIOL optics. Copyright 2013, SLACK Incorporated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23557223     DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20130318-04

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Refract Surg        ISSN: 1081-597X            Impact factor:   3.573


  6 in total

1.  Clinical outcomes with a new design in multifocal intraocular lens: a pilot study.

Authors:  Jorge L Alió; Pilar Yébana; Mario Cantó; Ana B Plaza; Alfredo Vega; Jorge L Alió Del Barrio; Francisco Lugo
Journal:  Eye Vis (Lond)       Date:  2020-07-18

2.  A comparative study on early vision quality after implantation of refractive segmental and diffractive multifocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  Huifang Lian; Weisong Ma; Qiuhong Wei; Xiaoyong Yuan
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2020 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.088

3.  Intraocular Lens Fragmentation Using Femtosecond Laser: An In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Chandra Bala; Jeffrey Shi; Kerrie Meades
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 3.283

4.  Visual and optical performance of diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses with different haptic designs: 6 month follow-up.

Authors:  Mengmeng Wang; Christine Carole C Corpuz; Megumi Fujiwara; Minoru Tomita
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-05-14

5.  Evaluation of the Effects of Multifocal Intraocular Lens Oculentis LENTIS Mplus LS-313 MF30 on Visual Performance in Patients Affected by Bilateral Cataract and Treated with Phacoemulsification.

Authors:  R Nuzzi; F Tripoli; A Ghilardi
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-08-30       Impact factor: 1.974

6.  Refractive lens exchange in younger and older presbyopes: comparison of complication rates, 3 months clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

Authors:  Steven C Schallhorn; Julie M Schallhorn; Martina Pelouskova; Jan A Venter; Keith A Hettinger; Stephen J Hannan; David Teenan
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-08-28
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.