The aim of this study was to compare the visual outcomes and subjective visual quality between bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus intraocular lens, J&J Vision Tecnis Symfony ® ZXR00 (Group A) and bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens, Alcon Acrysof IQ PanOptix ® TNFT00 (Group B). Methods: This prospective, nonrandomized, comparative study of consecutive cases assessed 52 eyes of 26 patients operated on by the same surgeon (WTH) and binocularly implanted with multifocal intraocular lenses between May 2016 and July 2018. Binocular visual acuity for far, intermediate and near was tested in all cases. Ophthalmological evaluation included the measurement of binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) at 40 cm, uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) at 70 cm, monocular visual defocus curve and the quality of life (QoL) questionnaire, National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-25 (NEI-VFQ 25). Results: Postoperative UDVA was 0.00 and 0.09 logMAR (P<0.001), UIVA was 0.20 and 0.39 logMAR (P<0.001) and UNVA was 0.16 and −0.01 logMAR (P<0.001) in groups A and B, respectively; postoperative CDVA was −0.05 and 0.06 logMAR (P<0.001) in groups A and B, respectively. Conclusion: Both groups reported good subjective quality of vision regarding long, intermediate and short distances. Group A had a better performance for binocular UDVA, UIVA at 70 cm and CDVA, while regarding the monocular defocus curve, Group A outperformed Group B for long distances. Furthermore, Group B surpassed it in the short to very short distances, between the range of ≥2.00 D to 5.00 D of vergence. While Group A had a better performance regarding the vergences between 0.00 and 1.00 D (P<0.05) and at the vergence of +2.50 D (P=0.007). Group B outran Group A for UNVA at 40 cm.
BackgroundTo report and describe an unusual case of a patient with optic disc pit in one eye and optic disc coloboma with a focal pit associated with macular retinoschisis in the other eye.Case presentationA 21-year-old woman presented with optic disc pit in the right eye and optic disc coloboma with a focal pit like excavation in the left eye. Macular spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) of the left eye revealed macular retinoschisis, without serous detachment.ConclusionsProper monitoring of patients with disc anomalies associated with maculopathy is mandatory. The use of OCT imaging during follow-up can help to identify involvement of the fovea or enlargement of the retinoschisis area.
Evaluate real-world data of outcomes from selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) performed in different regions of Brazil and investigate potential predictors of success associated with treatment. Multicenter retrospective case series with patients who underwent a primary SLT procedure. A total of 835 eyes from 835 patients were included. The mean follow-up was 916.8 ± 563.0 days. The mean age was 64.5 ± 14.9 years and 56.6% were women. We observed an intraocular pressure reduction comparing baseline to post-SLT measurements (18.4 ± 3.8 mmHg versus 14.8 ± 3.5 mmHg; P < 0.001) and mean number of glaucoma medications (1.8 ± 1.3 versus 1.4 ± 1.4; P < 0.001). We observed visual acuity loss over time (0.1 ± 0.3 versus 0.2 ± 0.3 logMAR, baseline and post-SLT, respectively, P = 0.009) and decrease in visual field mean deviation values (− 5.4 ± 5.9 versus − 5.7 ± 6.0 dB; P = 0.054) The Kaplan–Meier survival analysis showed an estimated probability of treatment success of 88% at 12 months, declining to 70% at 24 months and 54% at 36 months post-SLT. In the multivariable model, we found that a denser angle pigmentation (HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.57–0.85, P = 0.001) and corticosteroid treatment following SLT (HR 0.59; 95% CI 0.39–0.91, P = 0.018) were significantly associated with a lower risk for failure. Primary SLT achieved relatively high success rates without sight-threating complications in this real-world study with a large sample of Brazilian patients. These findings corroborate previous studies regarding SLT outcomes and may help clinicians to identify the best candidates for laser treatment.
Purpose: To compare VA outcomes in patients with advanced keratoconus wearing SCL or after ICRS or DALK. In addition, determine the percentage of complimentary treatments after ICRS and DALK, and which of these was fitting a SCL, and final visual acuity (f-VA) results. Methods: Retrospective case series analyzed 55 eyes with advanced keratoconus fitted with SCL, or after ICRS or a DALK between 2010 and 2018. The variables analyzed were sex, age, UDVA, CDVA, SEQ, K-readings, and f-VA after complimentary treatments. Results: Twenty-eight eyes underwent a DALK, 14 were fitted with a SCL, and other 13 underwent ICRS insertion. Patients after DALK and after ICRS showed statistically significant improvement in UDVA and CDVA after surgery, with no difference between these groups. Patients fitted with SCL showed statistically higher CDVA improvement when compared to ICRS. After DALK and ICRS, respectively, nine eyes (32.14%) and seven eyes (53.85%) were fitted with SCL. Comparison between f-VA with SCL in three groups showed that the best result was achieved in DALK + SCL, with statistically significant difference to only SCL. Conclusion: We showed that the CDVA of eyes fitted with SCL without any surgical treatment was statistically better than CDVA of eyes after ICRS insertion. After DALK and ICRS insertion, many patients needed a complimentary treatment to improve CDVA. The most chosen treatment was fitting a SCL. After this, all eyes showed statistically significant improvement in f-VA, with statistically better results for DALK + SCL when compared to SCL fitted in advanced keratoconus without any surgical treatment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.