Literature DB >> 32420220

Diffractive multifocal intraocular lens implantation in patients with monofocal intraocular lens in the contralateral eye.

Jae Yong Kim1, Yunhan Lee2, Hun Jae Won1, Hyerin Jeong1, Jin Hyoung Park1, Myoung Joon Kim1, Hungwon Tchah1.   

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate clinical outcomes of unilateral implantation of a diffractive multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) in patients with contralateral monofocal IOL.
METHODS: Twenty-two patients who already had implantation of a monofocal IOL in unilateral eye underwent implantation of a diffractive multifocal IOL in contralateral eye were enrolled. After 1, 6, and 12mo, uncorrected and distant corrected distant visual acuity (UCDVA and DCDVA), uncorrected and distant corrected intermediate-visual acuity (UCIVA and DCIVA), uncorrected and distant corrected near visual acuity (UCNVA and DCNVA), and contrast sensitivity were obtained. Halo/glare symptoms, spectacle dependence, and patient satisfaction were also evaluated.
RESULTS: The mean age was 67.86±7.25y and the average interval between two IOL implantations was 645.82±878.44d. At 1mo, binocular UCDVA was lower than 0.20 logMAR in 76% of patients (mean 0.12±0.13 logMAR), which increased to 90% by 6 and 12mo. The binocular UCDVA was significantly better than the monocular results (P<0.05) at 1, 6, and 12mo. Additionally, UCNVA was lower than 0.40 logMAR in 82% of patients, increasing to 90% by 6 and 12mo. Mean UCNVA in the multifocal IOL implanted eye was statistically significantly better than that in the monofocal IOL implanted eye (P<0.05) at 1, 6, and 12mo. About 5% of patients at 1 and 6mo, reported "severe glare or halo". Patient satisfaction rates were 95% and 91% at 6 and 12mo, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Unilateral implantation of multifocal IOL in patients with a contralateral, monofocal IOL implantation results in high patient satisfaction rate, with low severe glare or halo rate during follow-up. It can represent a good option for patients who have previously had a monofocal IOL implantation regardless of two year interval duration between two IOL implantations. International Journal of Ophthalmology Press.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cataract surgery; diffractive multifocal intraocular lens; near vision; unilateral implantation

Year:  2020        PMID: 32420220      PMCID: PMC7201359          DOI: 10.18240/ijo.2020.05.07

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


  20 in total

1.  Pseudophakic monovision using monofocal and multifocal intraocular lenses: hybrid monovision.

Authors:  Yoshihiko Iida; Kimiya Shimizu; Misae Ito
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 3.351

2.  A prospective, randomized, double-masked comparison of a zonal-progressive multifocal intraocular lens and a monofocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  R F Steinert; C T Post; S F Brint; C D Fritch; D L Hall; L W Wilder; I H Fine; S B Lichtenstein; S Masket; C Casebeer
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 12.079

Review 3.  Developments in the correction of presbyopia II: surgical approaches.

Authors:  W Neil Charman
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2014-04-10       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  A prospective comparative study of the AMO ARRAY zonal-progressive multifocal silicone intraocular lens and a monofocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  R F Steinert; B L Aker; D J Trentacost; P J Smith; N Tarantino
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 12.079

5.  Monovision pseudophakia.

Authors:  Scott Greenbaum
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 3.351

6.  Clinical Evaluation of Functional Vision of +1.5 Diopters near Addition, Aspheric, Rotational Asymmetric Multifocal Intraocular Lens.

Authors:  Florian Tobias Alwin Kretz; Rahmin Khoramnia; Mary Safwat Attia; Michael Janusz Koss; Katharina Linz; Gerd Uwe Auffarth
Journal:  Korean J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-09-29

7.  Intraocular Lens Power Calculation after Refractive Surgery: A Comparative Analysis of Accuracy and Predictability.

Authors:  Byeong Soo Kang; Jeong Mo Han; Joo Youn Oh; Mee Kum Kim; Won Ryang Wee
Journal:  Korean J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-06-29

8.  Comparison of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Methods Following Myopic Laser Refractive Surgery: New Options Using a Rotating Scheimpflug Camera.

Authors:  Kyuyeon Cho; Dong Hui Lim; Chan Min Yang; Eui Sang Chung; Tae Young Chung
Journal:  Korean J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-12

9.  Comparison of visual performance of multifocal intraocular lenses with same material monofocal intraocular lenses.

Authors:  Tomofusa Yamauchi; Hitoshi Tabuchi; Kosuke Takase; Hideharu Ohsugi; Zaigen Ohara; Yoshiaki Kiuchi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-28       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Investigation of the Changes in Refractive Surgery Trends in Korea.

Authors:  Jong Ho Ahn; Dong Hyun Kim; Kyung Hwan Shyn
Journal:  Korean J Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-01-25
View more
  3 in total

1.  Comparative analysis of visual quality between unilateral implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens and a rotationally asymmetric refractive multifocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  Na Hui; Mei-Fang Chu; Yan Li; Cong-Yi Wang; Lei Yu; Bo Ma
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-09-18       Impact factor: 1.645

2.  Visual and Refractive Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction Following Implantation of Monofocal IOL in One Eye and ERV IOL in the Contralateral Eye with Mini-Monovision.

Authors:  Sheetal Brar; Sri Ganesh; Raghavender Reddy Arra; Smith Snehal Sute
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-05-04

3.  Evaluation of Vision-Related Quality of Life After Unilateral Implantation of a New Trifocal Intraocular Lens.

Authors:  Cem Ozturkmen; Cem Kesim; Afsun Sahin
Journal:  Beyoglu Eye J       Date:  2022-08-05
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.