785 resultados para Multifocal intraocular lens
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:
Background/Aims: To evaluate multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) implantation in children. Methods: This is a retrospective study evaluating refractive, visual and safety results of MIOL in pediatric cataract surgery. Average follow-up was 25.73 ± 10.5 months. Surgery included 12 o'clock clear corneal incision, anterior capsulorhexis, lens material aspiration and MIOL implantation (SN6AD3; Alcon). Results: We included 34 cataract eyes of 26 pediatric patients aged 2-15 years, of which 14 (54%) were unilateral. Best near visual acuity (BNVA) and best distance visual acuity (BDVA) improved significantly in 100% of eyes (p = 0.0001). BDVA was above 0.8 in 31.25% (5/16) of bilateral cases. Significant stereopsis improvement was observed postoperatively in bilateral cases only (p = 0.01). Conclusion: MIOL implantation is a safe alternative to monofocal pseudophakia for pediatric cataract with a very low complication rate. Significant BNVA, BDVA and stereopsis improvement can be achieved, particularly in bilateral cases. Message: This study shows significant BDVA, BNVA and stereopsis improvement, especially in bilateral cases, after MIOL implantation for pediatric cataracts. © 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel.
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:
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:
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.
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:
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:
METHODS: Refractive lens exchange was performed with implantation of an AT Lisa 839M (trifocal) or 909MP (bifocal toric) IOL, the latter if corneal astigmatism was more than 0.75 diopter (D). The postoperative visual and refractive outcomes were evaluated. A prototype light-distortion analyzer was used to quantify the postoperative light-distortion indices. A control group of eyes in which a Tecnis ZCB00 1-piece monofocal IOL was implanted had the same examinations. RESULTS: A trifocal or bifocal toric IOL was implanted in 66 eyes. The control IOL was implanted in 18 eyes. All 3 groups obtained a significant improvement in uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) (P < .001) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) (P Z .001). The mean uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) was 0.123 logMAR with the trifocal IOL and 0.130 logMAR with the bifocal toric IOL. The residual refractive cylinder was less than 1.00 D in 86.7% of cases with the toric IOL. The mean light-distortion index was significantly higher in the multifocal IOL groups than in the monofocal group (P < .001), although no correlation was found between the light-distortion index and CDVA. CONCLUSIONS: The multifocal IOLs provided excellent UDVA and functional UNVA despite increased light-distortion indices. The light-distortion analyzer reliably quantified a subjective component of vision distinct from visual acuity; it may become a useful adjunct in the evaluation of visual quality obtained with multifocal IOLs.
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: IOL centration and stability after cataract surgery is of high interest for cataract surgeons and IOL-producing companies. We present a new imaging software to evaluate the centration of the rhexis and the centration of the IOL after cataract surgery.Methods: We developed, in collaboration with the Biomedical Imaging Group (BIG), EPFL, Lausanne, a new working tool in order to assess precisely outcomes after IOL-implantation, such as ideal capsulorhexis and IOL-centration. The software is a plug-in of ImageJ, a general-purpose image processing and image-analysis package. The specifications of this software are: evaluation of the rhexis-centration and evaluation the position of the IOL in the posterior chamber. The end points are to analyze the quality of the centration of a rhexis after cataract surgery, the deformation of the rhexis with capsular bag retraction and the centration of the IOL after implantation.Results: This software delivers tools to interactively measure the distances between limbus, IOL and capsulorhexis and its changes over time. The user is invited to adjust nodes of three radial curves for the limbus, rhexis and the optic of the IOL. The radial distances of the curves are computed to evaluate the IOL implantation. The user is also able to define patterns for ideal capsulorhexis and optimal IOL-centration. We are going to present examples of calculations after cataract surgery.Conclusions: Evaluation of the centration of the rhexis and of the IOL after cataract surgery is an important end point for optimal IOL implantation after cataract surgery. Especially multifocal or accommodative lenses need a precise position in the bag with a good stability over time. This software is able to evaluate these parameters just after the surgery but also its changes over time. The results of these evaluations can lead to an optimizing of surgical procedures and materials.
Resumo:
Purpose - To assess clinical outcomes and subjective experience after bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens (IOL). Setting - Midland Eye Institute, Solihull, United Kingdom. Design - Cohort study. Methods - Patients had bilateral implantation of Finevision trifocal IOLs. Uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and manifest refraction were measured 2 months postoperatively. Defocus curves were assessed under photopic and mesopic conditions over a range of +1.50 to -4.00 diopters (D) in 0.50 D steps. Contrast sensitivity function was assessed under photopic conditions. Halometry was used to measure the angular size of monocular and binocular photopic scotomas arising from a glare source. Patient satisfaction with uncorrected near vision was assessed using the Near Activity Visual Questionnaire (NAVQ). Results - The mean monocular CDVA was 0.08 logMAR ± 0.08 (SD) and the mean binocular CDVA, 0.06 ± 0.08 logMAR. Defocus curve testing showed an extended range of clear vision from +1.00 to -2.50 D defocus, with a significant difference in acuity between photopic conditions and mesopic conditions at -1.50 D defocus only. Photopic contrast sensitivity was significantly better binocularly than monocularly at all spatial frequencies. Halometry showed a glare scotoma of a mean size similar to that in previous studies of multifocal and accommodating IOLs; there were no subjective complaints of dysphotopsia. The mean NAVQ Rasch score for satisfaction with near vision was 15.9 ± 10.7 logits. Conclusions - The trifocal IOL implanted binocularly produced good distance visual acuity and near and intermediate visual function. Patients were very satisfied with their uncorrected near vision.
Resumo:
Purpose: To evaluate wavefront performance and modulation transfer function (MTF) in the human eye aft er the implantation of diffractive or refractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). Materials and Methods: This was a prospective, interventional, comparative, nonrandomized clinical study. Uncorrected distance and near visual acuity, and wavefront analysis including MTF curves (iTrace aberrometer, Tracey Technologies, Houston, TX, USA) were measured in 60 patients aft er bilateral IOL implantation with 6 months of follow-up. Forty eyes received the diffractive ReSTOR (Alcon), 40 eyes received the refractive ReZoom (Advanced Medical Optics) and 40 eyes, the Tecnis ZM900 (Advanced Medical Optics). The comparison of MTF and aberration between the intraocular lenses was performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by the Dunn test when necessary. Results: The mean uncorrected distance visual acuity was similar in all three groups of multifocal IOLs. The ReSTOR group provided better uncorrected near visual acuity than the ReZoom group (P < 0.001), but similar to the Tecnis group. Spherical aberration was significantly higher in the ReZoom group (P = 0.007). Similar MTF curves were found for the aspheric multifocal IOL Tecnis and the spheric multifocal IOL ReSTOR, and both performed better than the multifocal IOL ReZoom in a 5 mm pupil (P < 0.001 at all spatial frequencies). Conclusions: Diffractive IOLs studied presented similar MTF curves for a 5 mm pupil diameter. Both diffractive IOLs showed similar spherical aberration, which was significantly better with the full-diffractive IOL Tecnis than with the refractive IOL ReZoom.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To determine whether implantation of an aspherical intraocular lens (IOL) results in reduced ocular aberrations and improved contrast sensitivity after cataract surgery without critical reduction of depth of focus. DESIGN: Double-blinded, randomized, prospective study. METHODS: In an intraindividual study of 25 patients with bilateral cataract, an aspherical IOL (Akreos Advanced Optic [AO]; Bausch & Lomb, Inc., Rochester, New York, USA) was implanted in one eye and a spherical IOL (Akreos Fit; Bausch & Lomb, Inc) in the fellow eye. Higher-order aberrations with a 5- and 6-mm pupil were measured with a dynamic retinoscopy aberrometer at 1 and 3 months after surgery. Uncorrected and best-corrected visual acuity and contrast sensitivity under mesopic and photopic conditions also were measured. Distance-corrected near and intermediate visual acuity were studied as a measurement of depth of focus. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between eyes in uncorrected and best-corrected visual acuity at I and 3 months after surgery. There was a statistically significant between-group difference in contrast sensitivity under photopic conditions at 12 cycles per degree and under mesopic conditions at all spatial frequencies. The Akreos AO group obtained statistically significant lower values of higher-order aberrations and spherical aberration with 5- and 6-mm pupils compared with the Akreos Fit group (P < .05). There was no significant difference in distance-corrected near and intermediate visual acuity between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Aspherical aberration-free Akreos AO IOL induced significantly less higher-order aberrations and spherical aberration than the Akreos Fit. Contrast sensitivity was better under mesopic conditions with the Akreos AO with similar results of depth of focus. (Am J Ophthalmol 2010;149:383-389. (C) 2010 by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
Resumo:
PURPOSE To compare reading ability after cataract surgery and bilateral implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with a +3 00 diopter (D) addition (add) or a +4 00 D add SETTING Department of Ophthalmology, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil DESIGN Prospective comparative study METHODS Patients scheduled for cataract surgery were randomly assigned to bilateral implantation of an aspheric AcrySof ReSTOR multifocal IOL with a +3 00 diopter (D) addition (add) or a +4 00 D add The reading speed, critical print size, and reading acuity were measured binocularly with best correction using MNREAD acuity charts 6 months after surgery Patients were tested with the chart at the best patient-preferred reading distance and at 40 cm Binocular uncorrected and best distance-corrected visual acuities at far and near were also measured RESULTS The study enrolled 32 patients At the best reading distance the results were similar between the 2 IOL groups in all reading parameters When tested at 40 cm, reading speed at all print sizes from 03 to 00 (all P< 001), critical print size (P< 001) and reading acuity (P = 014) were statistically significantly better in the +3 00 D IOL group than in the +4 00 DIOL group Uncorrected and corrected visual acuities at far and near were similar between the 2 groups CONCLUSION Although the 2 IOL groups had similar performance in reading parameters, patients had to adjust to their best reading distance The +3 00 D IOL performed better than the +4 00 D IOL at 40 cm