PurposeTo compare the clinical performance between trifocal and bifocal intraocular lenses in bilateral cataract and/or refractive lens exchange (RLE) surgery.MethodsA comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and Web of Science was performed through October 2016 to identify randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative cohort studies. The primary outcomes were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), defocus curve, spectacle independence, patient satisfaction and contrast sensitivity. The secondary outcomes were residual sphere, spherical equivalent (SE), cylinder and complications.ResultsSix RCTs and 2 cohort studies including 568 eyes (278 in the trifocal group and 290 in the bifocal group) were identified. There was a statically significant difference between the two groups in UDVA (WMD: -0.03, 95% CI: -0.05 to -0.01, P = 0.005), but the difference (0.03 log MAR) is not clinically significant. Intermediate visual acuity was better in the trifocal IOL group judging from UIVA and defocus curves. There was a statically significant difference between the two groups in residual cylinder (WMD: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.20, P = 0.02), and subgroup AT Lisa tri 839MP trifocal also showed significant better UNVA than bifocal IOLs (WMD: -0.13, 95% CI: -0.17 to -0.08, P<0.00001). However, no significant differences were observed in UNVA (WMD: -0.04, 95% CI: -0.11 to 0.02, P = 0.19), spectacle independence (WMD: 1.27, 95% CI: 0.89 to 18.15, P = 0.07), patient satisfaction (WMD: 4.01, 95% CI: 0.07 to 22.72, P = 0.87), residual sphere (WMD: -0.03, 95% CI: -0.18 to 0.13, P = 0.74), SE (WMD: 0.04, 95% CI: -0.09 to 0.16, P = 0.55) or complications (WMD: 2.08, 95% CI: 0.35 to 12.43, P = 0.42).ConclusionsTrifocal IOL technology (especially AT Lisa trifocal 839M trifocal) had a clear advantage over bifocal IOLs in intermediate visual acuity, while both trifocal IOLs and bifocal IOLs showed excellent performance in distance visual acuity. AT Lisa trifocal 839M trifocal could provide better uncorrected near visual acuity than bifocal IOLs. However, more evidence is needed to compare their spectacle independence, higher satisfaction rate, and photic phenomena.
Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ocular biometric parameters in adult cataract patients from China and create an anterior chamber depth (ACD) regression model. Methods The ocular biometric records of 28,709 right eyes of cataract surgery candidates who were treated at Aier Eye Hospitals in nine cities from 2018 to 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. All measurements were taken with IOLMaster 700. We included patients who were at least 40 years old and were diagnosed with cataract. Results The mean age of the patients was 68.6 ± 11.0 years. The mean values recorded were as follows: axial length (AL), 24.17 ± 2.47 mm; mean keratometry (Km) value, 44.26 ± 1.70 D; corneal astigmatism (CA), 1.06 ± 0.96 D; ACD, 3.02 ± 0.45 mm; lens thickness (LT), 4.52 ± 0.45 mm; central corneal thickness (CCT), 0.534 ± 0.04 mm; and white to white (WTW) corneal diameter, 11.64 ± 0.46 mm. ACD correlated positively with AL (Spearman coefficient, 0.544) and WTW (0.300), but negatively with LT (-0.660) and age (-0.285) (all P < 0.01). In the multivariate regression analysis of ACD, which included LT, AL, WTW, sex, Km, CCT, and age, there was a reasonable prediction with adjusted R2 = 0.641. Conclusions Cataract patients with longer AL and wider WTW have deeper ACD. With increasing age and lens thickening ACD becomes shallower. Based on the standardized coefficients of ACD multivariate regression analysis from the study, LT is the main factor that affects ACD, and is followed by AL.
Purpose: To compare corneal astigmatism obtained from an optical coherence tomography-based biometer (OCT) and dual Scheimpflug analyzer (DSA). Setting: Cullen Eye Institute, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA. Design: Retrospective case series. Methods: Consecutive cases with both OCT and DSA measurements were reviewed. Three parameters were analyzed with OCT and DSA: (1) standard keratometric astigmatism (K vs simulated keratometry [SimK]), (2) posterior corneal astigmatism, and (3) total corneal astigmatism (total keratometry [TK] vs total corneal power [TCP]). The magnitudes of corneal astigmatism obtained from the 2 devices were compared. Vector analysis was used to assess differences in corneal astigmatism between devices. Results: In this study 530 corneas in 530 patients were measured. Compared with the DSA, the OCT produced a lower mean magnitude of posterior corneal astigmatism (−0.19 vs −0.29 diopter [D]) and a higher percentage of eyes with magnitude ≤0.25 D (75.5% vs 41.9%) (P < .05). Comparing TK and TCP, (1) TK was greater in magnitudes (1.03 vs 0.98 D); (2) 84.3% of eyes had differences in magnitude of ≤0.50 D; (3) in eyes with TK astigmatism ≥0.5 D, 34.5% and 60.1% of eyes had differences in steep meridian of ≤5 degrees and ≤10 degrees, respectively, and (4) 59.2% of eyes had vector differences of ≤0.50 D. In with-the-rule and against-the-rule eyes, respectively, the vector differences between TK and TCP were 0.16 D @ 83 degrees and 0.17 D @ 12 degrees, and in posterior corneal astigmatism, 0.06 D @ 173 degrees; and 0.15 D @ 175 degrees. Conclusions: There were clinically significant differences in total corneal astigmatism obtained from OCT and DSA devices. Compared with DSA, OCT produced lower values for posterior corneal astigmatism.
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.