Literature DB >> 24427795

Comparison of near vision, intraocular lens movement, and depth of focus with accommodating and monofocal intraocular lenses.

Anish Dhital, David J Spalton, Kavita B Gala.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare visual acuity, intraocular lens (IOL) movement, and depth of focus with the Crystalens HD single-optic accommodating IOL and the Tecnis ZCB00 aspheric monofocal IOL.
SETTING: St. Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled trial.
METHODS: Patients with bilateral symptomatic cataract had bilateral sequential cataract surgery within 6 weeks with randomized implantation of the accommodating or monofocal IOL in both eyes. Exclusion criteria included other ocular conditions and corneal astigmatism greater than 2.00 diopters. The primary outcome was uniocular distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA). Secondary measures were IOL movement, depth of focus, intermediate and distance vision, objective refraction, and pupil size at distance and near fixation. Results from 3 months postoperatively are presented.
RESULTS: Three months postoperatively, 64 patients (32 in each group) were available for study. The distance vision was not statistically significantly different between the accommodating IOL and monofocal IOL (mean 0.05 logMAR versus 0.06 logMAR). The mean DCNVA (0.48 logMAR ± 0.15 [SD] versus 0.61 ± 0.13 logMAR) and intermediate visual acuity (0.08 ± 0.1 logMAR versus 0.20 ± 0.09 logMAR) were significantly better with the accommodating IOL (P<.001). Neither IOL had clinically significant movement, and near vision did not directly correlate with movement of the accommodating IOL. The accommodating IOL provided greater depth of focus.
CONCLUSIONS: Near and intermediate acuities were better with the accommodating IOL. This effect was not directly linked to IOL movement but was at least partly due to depth of focus.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24427795     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.05.049

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


  6 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Pseudo-accommodation in non-amblyopic children after bilateral cataract surgery and implantation with a monofocal intraocular lens: prevalence and possible mechanisms.

Authors:  Charlotte Dénier; Pascal Dureau; Catherine Edelson; Amandine Barjol; Georges Caputo
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-10-26       Impact factor: 3.117

3.  Visual outcomes 24 months after LaserACE.

Authors:  AnnMarie Hipsley; David Hui-Kang Ma; Chi-Chin Sun; Mitchell A Jackson; Daniel Goldberg; Brad Hall
Journal:  Eye Vis (Lond)       Date:  2017-06-16

Review 4.  Review of current status of refractive lens exchange and role of dysfunctional lens index as its new indication.

Authors:  Luci Kaweri; Chandrashekhar Wavikar; Edwin James; Payal Pandit; Namrata Bhuta
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 1.848

Review 5.  Accommodative intraocular lenses: where are we and where we are going.

Authors:  Jorge L Alió; Jorge L Alió Del Barrio; Alfredo Vega-Estrada
Journal:  Eye Vis (Lond)       Date:  2017-06-26

Review 6.  The efficacy of accommodative versus monofocal intraocular lenses for cataract patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hongwei Zhou; Chongyan Zhu; Wenya Xu; Fang Zhou
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 1.817

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.