Literature DB >> 29634837

Visual Performance of a New Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lens Compared to a Distance-Dominant Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lens.

Giacomo Savini, Domenico Schiano-Lomoriello, Nicole Balducci, Piero Barboni.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate the clinical performance of a new extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) and compare it to that of a distance-dominant diffractive multifocal IOL.
METHODS: Patients implanted with an EDOF IOL (Mini Well; SIFI, Catania, Italy) inducing spherical aberration and with a multifocal IOL (ReSTOR SV25T; Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Fort Worth, TX) were analyzed. The following monocular parameters were investigated: corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA), reading speed, defocus curve, contrast sensitivity, and halos and glare as quantified by a simulator (Halo & Glare Simulator; Eyeland-Design Network GmbH, Vreden, Germany) and questionnaire.
RESULTS: Twenty patients with the EDOF IOL and 37 with the multifocal IOL were enrolled. No statistically significant difference was observed for CDVA. The defocus curve of the EDOF IOL revealed no gaps for the intermediate range. Statistically significant differences were observed at -1.00 diopter (D) (EDOF IOL: 0.08 ± 0.09 logMAR; multifocal IOL: 0.21 ± 0.12 logMAR; P < .0001) and -1.50 D defocus (EDOF IOL: 0.15 ± 0.11 logMAR; multifocal IOL: 0.24 ± 0.13 logMAR; P = .0122). The reading speed at 40 cm was similar at all print sizes. The mean DCNVA was the same (EDOF IOL: 0.35 ± 0.14 logRAD, multifocal IOL: 0.35 ± 0.13 logRAD). No differences in contrast sensitivity were detected. According to the simulator, halos had a smaller mean size (P = .0439) and a lower mean intensity (P = .0222) with the EDOF IOL. No statistically significant differences were detected for glare size.
CONCLUSIONS: The new EDOF IOL performed similarly to a multifocal IOL at distance and near but was superior at intermediate distances. [J Refract Surg. 2018;34(4):228-235.]. Copyright 2018, SLACK Incorporated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29634837     DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20180125-01

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


  23 in total

1.  Functional assessment of a new extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens.

Authors:  Giacomo Savini; Nicole Balducci; Claudio Carbonara; Scipione Rossi; Manuel Altieri; Nicola Frugis; Emilia Zappulla; Roberto Bellucci; Giovanni Alessio
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2018-09-28       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  Peripheral vision and hazard detection with average phakic and pseudophakic optical errors.

Authors:  Abinaya Priya Venkataraman; Robert Rosén; Aixa Alarcon Heredia; Patricia Piers; Carmen Canovas Vidal; Linda Lundström
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 3.732

3.  Visual acuity and defocus curves with six multifocal intraocular lenses.

Authors:  Miguel A Gil; Consuelo Varón; Genis Cardona; José A Buil
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-10-17       Impact factor: 2.031

4.  Visual and optical quality of enhanced intermediate monofocal versus standard monofocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  Nuria Garzón; Francisco Poyales; César Albarrán-Diego; Laura Rico-Del-Viejo; Lidia Pérez-Sanz; María García-Montero
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-05-27       Impact factor: 3.535

5.  Evaluating Optical Quality of a New Hydrophilic Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lens and Comparison to the Monofocal Counterpart: An Optical Bench Analysis.

Authors:  Andreas F Borkenstein; Eva-Maria Borkenstein; Ruediger Schmid
Journal:  Ophthalmol Ther       Date:  2022-08-30

6.  How does the world appear to patients with multifocal intraocular lenses?: a mobile model eye experiment.

Authors:  Eun Chul Kim; Kyung-Sun Na; Hyun Seung Kim; Ho Sik Hwang
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-05-06       Impact factor: 2.209

7.  Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes between Echelette Extended Range of Vision and Diffractive Bifocal Intraocular Lenses.

Authors:  Xin Liu; Xiaohui Song; Wei Wang; Yanan Zhu; Danni Lyu; Xingchao Shentu; Peiqing Chen; Yibo Yu; Ke Yao
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-09-23       Impact factor: 1.909

8.  Clinical outcomes after mix-and-match implantation of diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses with + 2.75 and + 4.00 diopter add powers.

Authors:  Jae Hyuck Lee; Hun Lee; Jin Ah Lee; Aeri Yoo; Jae Yong Kim; Hungwon Tchah
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-05-15       Impact factor: 2.209

9.  Visual Performances of a New Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lens with a Refractive Design: A Prospective Study After Bilateral Implantation.

Authors:  Leopoldo Spadea; Maria Ilaria Giannico; Martina Formisano; Ludovico Alisi
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 2.423

Review 10.  Extended Depth-of-Field Intraocular Lenses: An Update.

Authors:  Piotr Kanclerz; Francesca Toto; Andrzej Grzybowski; Jorge L Alio
Journal:  Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila)       Date:  2020 May-Jun
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.