Literature DB >> 27913863

[Multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) surgery in young non-presbyopic ametropes : Reasonable and safe?]

A Frings1, J Steinberg1,2,3, S J Linke1,2,3, V Druchkiv1, T Katz4,5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Refractive lens exchange and implantation of a multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) is mainly advised for ametropes with presbyopia. Non-presbyopic young ametropes who wish spectacle-independence are usually treated with corneal refractive surgery or phakic lenses.
OBJECTIVES: This retrospective case series aimed to analyse the refractive and subjective satisfaction outcome after MIOL surgery in both eyes of non-presbyopic ametropes where other treatment options were not possible.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective case series comprised consecutively treated 32 eyes of 16 patients (5 myopic, 11 hyperopic patients; mean age 31 ± 6 years) who wished spectacle-independence and thus received an aspheric bifocal biconvex refractive-diffractive single-piece MIOL (Acri.Lisa 366/809, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG). Refractive data prior to and after surgery as well as subjective satisfaction at the 1‑year follow-up examination were assessed.
RESULTS: Related to distance corrected near visual acuity myopic eyes had a median efficacy index (EI) of 0.92 (±0.20) and hyperopes of 0.91 (±0.12) (P = 0.415). For intermediate vision, in both groups a lower EI (<0.5; P = 0.188) resulted in lower subjective satisfaction, which was higher for near and distance vision. Some of hyperopic patients reported limitations in near and distance vision, only one hyperopic patient would not have chosen this surgery again. None had a related complication during the follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: When neither laser refractive surgery nor implantation of a phakic lens is possible, young non-presbyopic ametropes do profit from MIOL surgery with an aspheric bifocal biconvex refractive-diffractive MIOL.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Accommodation; Efficacy index; Multifocal intraocular lens; Patient satisfaction; Refractive lens exchange

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27913863     DOI: 10.1007/s00347-016-0401-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmologe        ISSN: 0941-293X            Impact factor:   1.059


  14 in total

1.  Comparison of a new-generation sectorial addition multifocal intraocular lens and a diffractive apodized multifocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  Jan Willem van der Linden; Mirjam van Velthoven; Ivanka van der Meulen; Carla Nieuwendaal; Maarten Mourits; Ruth Lapid-Gortzak
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2011-11-10       Impact factor: 3.351

2.  Incidence of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment after bag-in-the-lens intraocular lens implantation.

Authors:  Marie-José Tassignon; Jonas J I Van den Heurck; Kim B M Boven; Jan Van Looveren; Kristien Wouters; Ernesto Bali; Sorcha Ní Dhubhghaill; Danny G P Mathysen
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 3.351

3.  Clinical outcomes and intraocular optical quality of a diffractive multifocal intraocular lens with asymmetrical light distribution.

Authors:  Jorge L Alió; Bassam Elkady; Dolores Ortiz; Gonzalo Bernabeu
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.351

4.  ReSTOR intraocular lens implantation in cataract surgery: quality of vision.

Authors:  Patrick J T Chiam; Jin H Chan; Rajesh K Aggarwal; Sam Kasaby
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 3.351

5.  Differences in contrast sensitivity between monofocal, multifocal and accommodating intraocular lenses: long-term results.

Authors:  Cem Mesci; Hasan H Erbil; Ali Olgun; Nihat Aydin; Bahadir Candemir; Aylin A Akçakaya
Journal:  Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 4.207

Review 6.  Multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses after cataract extraction.

Authors:  M Leyland; E Pringle
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2006-10-18

7.  Working-age cataract patients: visual results, reading performance, and quality of life with three diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses.

Authors:  Giovanni Cillino; Alessandra Casuccio; Mattia Pasti; Valeria Bono; Rita Mencucci; Salvatore Cillino
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2013-08-14       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  Subjective photic phenomena with refractive multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses. results of a multicenter questionnaire.

Authors:  G Häring; H B Dick; F Krummenauer; U Weissmantel; W Kröncke
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 3.351

9.  Comparative analysis of the visual and refractive outcomes of an aspheric diffractive intraocular lens with and without toricity.

Authors:  Elisabeth H Frieling-Reuss
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 3.351

10.  Retinal straylight and complaint scores 18 months after implantation of the AcrySof monofocal and ReSTOR diffractive intraocular lenses.

Authors:  Thomas Hofmann; Bruno Zuberbuhler; Alejandro Cervino; Robert Montés-Micó; Eduard Haefliger
Journal:  J Refract Surg       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 3.573

View more
  1 in total

1.  Contralateral Posterior Chamber Phakic Intraocular Lens Implantation as Rehabilitation of Refractive Lens Exchange with a Monofocal Intraocular Lens in a Young, Nonpresbyopic, Bilateral Highly-Myopic Patient.

Authors:  Kepa Balparda; Claudia Marcela Vanegas-Ramírez; Laura Segura-Muñoz; Manuela Gómez-Londoño
Journal:  Case Rep Ophthalmol Med       Date:  2019-10-16
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.