895 resultados para Lente intraocular multifocal
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Índice, resumen, conclusiones y bibliografía de la memoria del Máster en Optometría Clínica y Visión, Programa formativo en Biomedicina y Tecnologías para la vida.
Resumo:
Objetivo: Evaluar mediante tomografía de coherencia óptica (OCT) las variaciones de espesor macular producidas a lo largo del tiempo en ojos pseudoafáquicos implantados con una lente intraocular (LIO) transparente en comparación con sus respectivos ojos contralarerales implantados con LIO amarilla. Métodos: El espesor macular de 36 ojos de 18 sujetos fue evaluado mediante OCT. Los sujetos presentaban edades superiores a 65 años y habían sido intervenidos de cataratas en ambos ojos en 2 cirugías independientes. La principal característica de los individuos es que llevaban implantada una LIO con diferente absorción en cada ojo: transparente (absorbente de la radiación ultravioleta) y amarilla (con filtro adicional absorbente de las radiaciones violeta-azul del espectro visible). El espesor macular se evaluó en 2 sesiones separadas en el tiempo por un intervalo de tiempo de 5 años, mediante el sistema Stratus-OCT (protocolo fast macular thickness). Se analizaron estadísticamente las diferencias en la evolución del espesor macular entre ojos con diferente tipo de LIO. Resultados: Tras 5 años de seguimiento, se observó que los ojos implantados con LIO transparente manifestaban una reducción del espesor macular estadísticamente significativa, superior a la esperada por el aumento de la edad. Sin embargo, los ojos implantados con LIOs amarillas mantuvieron su espesor macular estable. La disminución del espesor macular promedio en ojos implantados con LIO transparente fue de 5 ± 8 μm (p = 0,02) y la reducción del espesor foveal fue de 10 ± 17 μm (p = 0,02). Conclusiones: Los cambios de espesor macular producidos en ojos implantados con una LIO amarilla difieren de los cambios manifestados en ojos con LIO transparente. Estas observaciones apuntan a un posible efecto protector de las LIOs amarillas contra los efectos dañinos de la luz en sujetos pseudoafáquicos. Sin embargo, estudios con un mayor tamaño muestral y mayor tiempo de seguimiento son necesarios para confirmar que la protección inducida por este tipo de LIO es clínicamente significativa.
Resumo:
Purpose
To evaluate the impact of the position of an asymmetric multifocal near segment on visual quality.
Setting
Cathedral Eye Clinic, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Design
Retrospective comparative case series.
Methods
Data from consecutive patients who had bilateral implantation of the Lentis Mplus LS-312 multifocal intraocular lens were divided into 2 groups. One group received inferonasal near-segment placement and the other, superotemporal near-segment placement. A +3.00 diopter (D) reading addition (add) was used in all eyes. The main outcome measures included uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), contrast sensitivity, and quality of vision. Follow-up was 3 months.
Results
Patients ranged in age from 43 to 76 years. The inferonasal group comprised 80 eyes (40 patients) and the superotemporal group, 76 eyes (38 patients). The mean 3-month spherical equivalent was −0.11 D ± 0.49 (SD) in the inferonasal group and −0.18 ± 0.46 D in the superotemporal group. The mean postoperative UDVA was 0.14 ± 0.10 logMAR and 0.18 ± 0.15 logMAR, respectively. The mean monocular UNVA was 0.21 ± 0.14 logRAD and 0.24 ± 0.13 logRAD, respectively. No significant differences were observed in the higher-order aberrations, total Strehl ratio (point-spread function), or modulation transfer function between the groups. Dysphotopic symptoms measured with a validated quality-of-vision questionnaire were not significantly different between groups.
Conclusion
Positioning of the near add did not significantly affect objective or subjective visual function parameters.
Resumo:
Multifocal intraocular lenses (MF IOLs) have concentric optical zones with different dioptric power, enabling patients to have good visual acuity at multiple focal points. However, several optical limitations have been attributed to this particular design. The purpose of this study is to access the effect of MF IOLs design on the accuracy of retinal optical coherence tomography (OCT). Cross-sectional study conducted at the Refractive Surgery Department of Central Lisbon Hospital Center. Twenty-three eyes of 15 patients with a diffractive MF IOL and 27 eyes of 15 patients with an aspheric monofocal IOL were included in this study. All patients underwent OCT macular scans using Heidelberg Spectralis®. Macular thickness and volume values and image quality (Q factor) were compared between the two groups. There were no statistically significant differences between both groups regarding macular thickness or volume measurements. Retinal OCT image quality was significantly lower in the MF IOL group (p < 0.01). MF IOLs are associated with a significant decrease in OCT image quality. However, this fact does not seem to compromise the accuracy of spectral domain OCT retinal measurements.
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To determine whether the improvement in intermediate vision after bilateral implantation of an aspheric multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) with a +3.00 diopter (D) addition (add) occurs at the expense of optical quality compared with the previous model with a +4.00 D add. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil. DESIGN: Prospective randomized double-masked comparative clinical trial. METHODS: One year after bilateral implantation of Acrysof Restor SN6AD1 +3.00 D IOLs or Acrysof Restor SN6AD3 +4.00 D IOLs, optical quality was evaluated by analyzing the in vivo modulation transfer function (MTF) and point-spread function (expressed as Strehl ratio). The Strehl ratio and MTF curve with a 4.0 pupil and a 6.0 mm pupil were measured by dynamic retinoscopy aberrometry. The uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuities at 4 m, uncorrected and distance-corrected near visual acuities at 40 cm, and uncorrected and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuities at 50 cm, 60 cm, and 70 cm were measured. RESULTS: Both IOL groups comprised 40 eyes of 20 patients. One year postoperatively, there were no statistically significant between-group differences in the MTF or Strehl ratio with either pupil size. There were no statistically significant between-group differences in distance or near visual acuity. Intermediate visual acuity was significantly better in the +3.00 D IOL group. CONCLUSION: Results indicate that the improvement in intermediate vision in eyes with the aspheric multifocal +3.00 D add IOL occurred without decreasing optical quality over that with the previous version IOL with a +4.00 D add.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To compare disk halo size in response to a glare source in eyes with an aspheric apodized diffractive multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) or aspheric monofocal IOL. SETTING: Rementeria Ophthalmological Clinic, Madrid, Spain. DESIGN: Prospective randomized masked study. METHOD: Halo radius was measured using a vision monitor (MonCv3) with low-luminance optotypes in eyes that had cataract surgery and bilateral implantion of an Acrysof Restor SN6AD1 multifocal IOL or Acrysof IQ monofocal IOL 6 to 9 months previously. The visual angle subtended by the disk halo radius was calculated in minutes of arc (arcmin). Patient complaints of halo disturbances were recorded. Monocular uncorrected distance visual acutity (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) were measured using high-contrast (96%) and low-contrast (10%) logMAR letter charts. RESULTS: The study comprised 39 eyes of 39 subjects (aged 70 to 80 years); 21 eyes had a multifocal IOL and 18 eyes a monofocal IOL. The mean halo radius was 35 arcmin larger in the multifocal IOL group than the monofocal group (P<.05). Greater halo effects were reported in the multifocal IOL group (P<.05). The mean monocular high-contrast UDVA and low-contrast UDVA did not vary significantly between groups, whereas the mean monocular high-contrast CDVA and low-contrast CDVA were significantly worse at 0.12 logMAR and 0.13 logMAR in the multifocal than in the monofocal IOL group, respectively (P <.01). A significant positive correlation was detected by multiple linear regression between the halo radius and low-contrast UDVA in the multifocal IOL group (r = 0.72, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The diffractive multifocal IOL gave rise to a larger disk halo size, which was correlated with a worse low-contrast UDVA.
Resumo:
Background To evaluate the intraocular lens (IOL) position by analyzing the postoperative axis of internal astigmatism as well as the higher-order aberration (HOA) profile after cataract surgery following the implantation of a diffractive multifocal toric IOL. Methods Prospective study including 51 eyes with corneal astigmatism of 1.25D or higher of 29 patients with ages ranging between 20 and 61 years old. All cases underwent uneventful cataract surgery with implantation of the AT LISA 909 M toric IOL (Zeiss). Visual, refractive and corneal topograpy changes were evaluated during a 12-month follow-up. In addition, the axis of internal astigmatism as well as ocular, corneal, and internal HOA (5-mm pupil) were evaluated postoperatively by means of an integrated aberrometer (OPD Scan II, Nidek). Results A significant improvement in uncorrected distance and near visual acuities (p < 0.01) was found, which was consistent with a significant correction of manifest astigmatism (p < 0.01). No significant changes were observed in corneal astigmatism (p = 0.32). With regard to IOL alignment, the difference between the axes of postoperative internal and preoperative corneal astigmatisms was close to perpendicularity (12 months, 87.16° ± 7.14), without significant changes during the first 6 months (p ≥ 0.46). Small but significant changes were detected afterwards (p = 0.01). Additionally, this angular difference correlated with the postoperative magnitude of manifest cylinder (r = 0.31, p = 0.03). Minimal contribution of intraocular optics to the global magnitude of HOA was observed. Conclusions The diffractive multifocal toric IOL evaluated is able to provide a predictable astigmatic correction with apparent excellent levels of optical quality during the first year after implantation.
Resumo:
AIM: To evaluate the prediction error in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation for a rotationally asymmetric refractive multifocal IOL and the impact on this error of the optimization of the keratometric estimation of the corneal power and the prediction of the effective lens position (ELP). METHODS: Retrospective study including a total of 25 eyes of 13 patients (age, 50 to 83y) with previous cataract surgery with implantation of the Lentis Mplus LS-312 IOL (Oculentis GmbH, Germany). In all cases, an adjusted IOL power (PIOLadj) was calculated based on Gaussian optics using a variable keratometric index value (nkadj) for the estimation of the corneal power (Pkadj) and on a new value for ELP (ELPadj) obtained by multiple regression analysis. This PIOLadj was compared with the IOL power implanted (PIOLReal) and the value proposed by three conventional formulas (Haigis, Hoffer Q and Holladay). RESULTS: PIOLReal was not significantly different than PIOLadj and Holladay IOL power (P>0.05). In the Bland and Altman analysis, PIOLadj showed lower mean difference (-0.07 D) and limits of agreement (of 1.47 and -1.61 D) when compared to PIOLReal than the IOL power value obtained with the Holladay formula. Furthermore, ELPadj was significantly lower than ELP calculated with other conventional formulas (P<0.01) and was found to be dependent on axial length, anterior chamber depth and Pkadj. CONCLUSION: Refractive outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of the multifocal IOL Lentis Mplus LS-312 can be optimized by minimizing the keratometric error and by estimating ELP using a mathematical expression dependent on anatomical factors.
Resumo:
Purpose: To determine the most appropriate analysis technique for the differentiation of multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) designs using defocus curve assessment of visual capability.Methods:Four groups of fifteen subjects were implanted bilaterally with either monofocal intraocular lenses, refractive MIOLs, diffractive MIOLs, or a combination of refractive and diffractive MIOLs. Defocus curves between -5.0D and +1.5D were evaluated using an absolute and relative depth-of-focus method, the direct comparison method and a new 'Area-of-focus' metric. The results were correlated with a subjective perception of near and intermediate vision. Results:Neither depth-of-focus method of analysis were sensitive enough to differentiate between MIOL groups (p>0.05). The direct comparison method indicated that the refractive MIOL group performed better at +1.00, -1.00 and -1.50 D and worse at -3.00, -3.50, -4.00 and -5.00D compared to the diffractive MIOL group (p
Resumo:
Aim: To evaluate the performance of an aspheric diffractive multifocal acrylic intraocular lens (IOL), ZMB00 1-Piece Tecnis. Setting: Five sites across Europe. Methods: Fifty-two patients with cataracts (average age 68.5±10.5 years, 35 female) were bilaterally implanted with the aspheric diffractive multifocal IOL after completing a questionnaire regarding their optical visual symptoms, use of visual correction and their visual satisfaction. The questionnaire was completed again 4-6 months after surgery along with measures of uncorrected and best-corrected distance and near visual acuity, under photopic and mesopic lighting, reading ability, defocus curve testing and ocular examination for adverse events. Results: The residual refractive error was 0.01±0.47D with 56% of eyes within ±0.25D and 97% within ±1.0D. Uncorrected visual acuity was 0.02±0.10logMAR at distance and 0.15±0.30 logMAR at near, only reducing to 0.07±0.10logMAR at distance and 0.21±0.25logMAR at near in mesopic conditions.The defocus curve showed a near addition between 2.5-3.0 D allowing a reading acuity of 0.08±0.13 logMAR, with a range of clear vision <0.3 logMAR of ∼4.0 D. The average reading speed was 121.4±30.8 words per minute. Spectacle independence was 100% for distance and 88% for near, with high levels of satisfaction reported. Overall rating of vision without glasses could be explained (r=0.760) by preoperative best-corrected distance acuity, postoperative reading acuity and postoperative uncorrected distance acuity in photopic conditions (p<0.001). Only two minor adverse events occurred. Conclusions: The ZMB00 1-Piece Tecnis multifocal IOL provides a good visual outcome at distance and near with minimal adverse effects.
Resumo:
Purpose: To determine whether the ‘through-focus’ aberrations of a multifocal and accommodative intraocular lens (IOL) implanted patient can be used to provide rapid and reliable measures of their subjective range of clear vision. Methods: Eyes that had been implanted with a concentric (n = 8), segmented (n = 10) or accommodating (n = 6) intraocular lenses (mean age 62.9 ± 8.9 years; range 46-79 years) for over a year underwent simultaneous monocular subjective (electronic logMAR test chart at 4m with letters randomised between presentations) and objective (Aston open-field aberrometer) defocus curve testing for levels of defocus between +1.50 to -5.00DS in -0.50DS steps, in a randomised order. Pupil size and ocular aberration (a combination of the patient’s and the defocus inducing lens aberrations) at each level of blur was measured by the aberrometer. Visual acuity was measured subjectively at each level of defocus to determine the traditional defocus curve. Objective acuity was predicted using image quality metrics. Results: The range of clear focus differed between the three IOL types (F=15.506, P=0.001) as well as between subjective and objective defocus curves (F=6.685, p=0.049). There was no statistically significant difference between subjective and objective defocus curves in the segmented or concentric ring MIOL group (P>0.05). However a difference was found between the two measures and the accommodating IOL group (P<0.001). Mean Delta logMAR (predicted minus measured logMAR) across all target vergences was -0.06 ± 0.19 logMAR. Predicted logMAR defocus curves for the multifocal IOLs did not show a near vision addition peak, unlike the subjective measurement of visual acuity. However, there was a strong positive correlation between measured and predicted logMAR for all three IOLs (Pearson’s correlation: P<0.001). Conclusions: Current subjective procedures are lengthy and do not enable important additional measures such as defocus curves under differently luminance or contrast levels to be assessed, which may limit our understanding of MIOL performance in real-world conditions. In general objective aberrometry measures correlated well with the subjective assessment indicating the relative robustness of this technique in evaluating post-operative success with segmented and concentric ring MIOL.