Literature DB >> 24634872

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

Jun-Hua Li1, Yi-Fan Feng2, Yun-E Zhao1, Yin-Ying Zhao1, Lei Lin1.   

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate contrast visual acuity (CVA) after implantation of an aspheric apodized diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) or a spherical apodized diffractive IOL in cataract surgery.
METHOD: This prospective randomized controlled study with a 12-month follow-up compared the results of cataract surgery with implantation of an aspheric AcrySof ReSTOR SN6AD3 IOL (30 eyes) and a spherical AcrySof ReSTOR SN60D3 IOL (30 eyes). CVA with best distance correction was measured at 4 contrast levels (100%, 25%, 10% and 5%) under 3 levels of chart luminance [250, 85 and 25 candelas per square meter (cd/m(2))] using a multi-functional visual acuity tester (MFVA-100).
RESULTS: At 12 months after surgery, there were no statistically significant differences in 100% CVA and 25% CVA under 250cd/m(2) (P 100%=0.875 and P 25%=0.057) and 85cd/m(2) (P 100%=0.198 and P 25%=0.193) between the aspheric group and the spherical group. However, the 10% CVA and 5% CVA were significant better in aspheric group than spherical group under 250cd/m(2) (P 10%=0.042 and P 5%=0.007) and 85cd/m(2) (P 10%=0.002 and P 5%=0.039). Under the luminance level of 25cd/m(2), no significant differences was found in the 100% CVA between the 2 group (P 100%=0.245), while aspheric group had better visual acuity in the remaining 3 contracts (P 25%=0.023, P 10%=0.026 and P 5%=0.002, respectively).
CONCLUSION: [corrected] The aspheric AcrySof ReSTOR SN6AD3 IOL provided patients with better low-contrast visual acuity than the spherical AcrySof ReSTOR SN60D3 IOL.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cataract surgery; contrast sensitivity; intraocular lens; visual acuity

Year:  2014        PMID: 24634872      PMCID: PMC3949467          DOI: 10.3980/j.issn.2222-3959.2014.01.18

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 2222-3959            Impact factor:   1.779


  19 in total

1.  Intermediate visual function with different multifocal intraocular lens models.

Authors:  José F Alfonso; Luis Fernández-Vega; Cristina Puchades; Robert Montés-Micó
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 3.351

2.  [Comparison between OPD-Scan results and visual outcomes of Tecnis ZM900 and Restor SN60D3 diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses].

Authors:  Wilson Takashi Hida; Antonio Francisco Pimenta Motta; Newton Kara-José Júnior; Humberto Costa; Clayton Tokunaga; Livio Neiva Cordeiro; Daniela Gemperli; Celso Takashi Nakano
Journal:  Arq Bras Oftalmol       Date:  2008 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 0.872

3.  Quality of life evaluation after implantation of 2 multifocal intraocular lens models and a monofocal model.

Authors:  Jorge L Alió; Ana B Plaza-Puche; David P Piñero; Francisco Amparo; Jose L Rodríguez-Prats; María José Ayala
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 3.351

4.  Clear lens extraction with multifocal apodized diffractive intraocular lens implantation.

Authors:  Luis Fernández-Vega; José F Alfonso; Pedro P Rodríguez; Robert Montés-Micó
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 12.079

5.  Contrast sensitivity in the 'good eye' of adult patients with severe impairment in the other eye.

Authors:  Trisevgeni Giannakopoulou; Sotiris Plainis; Ioannis G Pallikaris; Miltiadis K Tsilimbaris
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2013-01-24       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Intraindividual comparison of higher-order aberrations after implantation of aspherical and spherical intraocular lenses as a function of pupil diameter.

Authors:  Thomas Kasper; Jens Bühren; Thomas Kohnen
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.351

7.  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

8.  Visual outcome and patient satisfaction after multifocal intraocular lens implantation: aspheric versus spherical design.

Authors:  Niels Erik de Vries; Carroll A B Webers; Frenne Verbakel; John de Brabander; Tos T Berendschot; Yanny Y Y Cheng; Muriel Doors; Rudy M M A Nuijts
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.351

9.  Aberration and contrast sensitivity comparison of aspherical and monofocal and multifocal intraocular lens eyes.

Authors:  Mingbing Zeng; Yizhi Liu; Xialin Liu; Zhaohui Yuan; Lixia Luo; Yuanlin Xia; Yangfa Zeng
Journal:  Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2007 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.207

10.  Prospective visual evaluation of apodized diffractive intraocular lenses.

Authors:  José F Alfonso; Luis Fernández-Vega; M Begoña Baamonde; Robert Montés-Micó
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.351

View more
  3 in total

1.  Visual performance with accommodating and multifocal intraocular lenses.

Authors:  Jie Lan; Yu-Sen Huang; Yun-Hai Dai; Xiao-Ming Wu; Jia-Jun Sun; Li-Xin Xie
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-02-18       Impact factor: 1.779

2.  Assessment of contrast sensitivity loss after intrastromal femtosecond laser and LASIK procedure.

Authors:  Elsa L C Mai; Ie-Bin Lian; David C K Chang
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-12-18       Impact factor: 1.779

3.  Clinical outcomes of a new diffractive multifocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  Baha Toygar; Ozge Yabas Kiziloglu; Okan Toygar; Ali Murat Hacimustafaoglu
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-12-18       Impact factor: 1.779

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.