Visual outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of a +3.00 D or +4.00 D aspheric diffractive multifocal intraocular lens: Comparative study

Vries, Niels E. de; Webers, Carroll A.B.; Montés‐Micó, Robert; Ferrer-Blasco, Teresa; Nuijts, Rudy M.M.A.

doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.01.036

Cited by 66 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results in our study confir med these results. We obtained contrast sensitivity values under mesopic and photopic conditions that were similar to those obtained by Cezón Prieto and Bautista (19) , Montés-Micó et al (28) , and de Vries et al (29) . In a normal population, contrast sensitivity levels measured with the CSV-1000 system were 1.56 ± 0.15 at 3 cpd, 1.80 ± 0.16 at 6 cpd, 1.50 ± 0.15 at 12 cpd, and 0.93 ± 0.25 at 18 cpd (30) .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Visual outcomes after implantation of a novel refractive toric multifocal intraocular lens

Shimoda¹,

Shimoda²,

Hida³

et al. 2014

Arquivos Brasileiros De Oftalmologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Visual outcomes after implantation of a novel refractive toric multifocal intraocular lens

Shimoda¹,

Shimoda²,

Hida³

et al. 2014

Arquivos Brasileiros De Oftalmologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although the central peak is mainly degraded by wavefront aberrations (lower-and higher-order), scattering affects the point spread function skirts. 21 In other studies, no significant differences were found in total, higher-order, spherical, and coma aberrations when comparing subjects with the Acrysof monofocal IQ IOL and Acrysof Restor SN6AD1 multifocal IOL, 10,22,23 most likely because of the aspheric apodization of the multifocal IOL. Another possible explanation is the limitations of measuring aberrations in diffractive IOLs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Disk halo size measured in individuals with monofocal versus diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses

Puell

Pérez-Carrasco

Hurtado-Ceña

et al. 2015

Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE:To compare disk halo size in response to a glare source in eyes implanted 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 39 eyes that had cataract surgery and the bilateral implant 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 lowcontrast (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. Mean halo radius was 35 arcmin larger in the multifocal IOL group than the monofocal group (P < .05). Greater halo effects (P < .05) were reported in the multifocal IOL group. Mean monocular high-contrast UDVA and low-contrast UDVA did not vary significantly between groups, whereas mean monocular high-contrast CDVA and low-contrast CDVA were significantly worse at 0.12 and 0.13 logMAR (P < .01) in the multifocal than in the monofocal IOL group, respectively. A significant positive correlation (r Z 0.72, P < .001) was detected by multiple linear regression between the halo radius and low-contrast UDVA in the multifocal IOL group. CONCLUSIONS:The diffractive multifocal IOL gave rise to a larger disk halo size, which was correlated with a worse low-contrast UDVA. The authors have no commercial or proprietary interests in the devices used in this study or manufacturing companies. J Cataract Refract Surg 2015; -:---Q 2015 ASCRS and ESCRSCurrent diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) provide satisfactory distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity, reducing spectacle dependency.1 However, adverse subjective visual phenomena, such as glare and halos, are often reported by patients with multifocal IOLs, especially when driving at night. 1Theoretical optical design predictions suggest that multifocal IOLs will induce more light scatter than monofocal IOLs.2 In a refractive-diffraction IOL designed to simultaneously yield focused images of near and far objects, 3 forward scattered light from a glare source forms a veil of luminance over the retina.Disk halos form because the out-of-focus image has a larger diameter than the sharp image on the retina. 4 The unwanted effect of the light in the out-of-focus image may be visually disturbing, depending on 2 factors: the distance along the optical axis between these 2 images (the greater the distance between the 2 separate focal points along the optical axis, the greater will be the diffusion or blur circle surrounding the primary focus), and their relative energy distribution (the ene...

show abstract

“…Several studies have shown that bifocal IOLs with a higher addition power provide worse visual acuity in the intermediate range than lenses with lower addition power. [7][8][9][10] Consequently, newly launched bifocal IOLs tend to have a design similar to previous models but with lower addition powers to improve visual outcomes in the intermediate range.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stability of a Novel Intraocular Lens Design: Comparison of Two Trifocal Lenses

Poyales¹,

Garzón²,

Rozema³

et al. 2016

J Refract Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ultifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) enable spectacle independence 1 by providing several points of focus. A new generation of multifocal IOLs, known as trifocal IOLs (designed with three focal points) entered the European market in 2010, with the launch of the FineVision/MicroF IOL (PhysIOL, Liège, Belgium). Many studies describing optical bench testing and clinical outcomes for this IOL have been published since then.The presence of astigmatism in multifocal IOLs scatters each point of focus, resulting in multifocality failure. Therefore, astigmatism correction should also be a surgical goal. An accurate alignment of the toric IOL with the astigmatism axis is key for maximum vision correction. This can only be achieved if the IOL remains stable within the eye (ie, it must not rotate after implantation). The original FineVision/ MicroF IOL, a trifocal IOL model designed for microincision cataract surgery, was adapted with a new double C-loop haptic design that should guarantee the IOL's rotational stability. This new IOL model, which includes a toric component, was named POD FineVision.In this study, we assessed the effect on rotational and capsular centration stability of this new haptic design and whether or not this leads to an improved visual performance to validate the material and the design of the POD FineVision IOL for toric versions. PATIENTS AND METHODS Study deSignIn this randomized controlled trial, we compared the efficacy and rotational stability of two IOLs: a hydrophilic acryl-M ABSTRACT PURPOSE: To compare visual outcomes, rotational stability, and centration in a randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing cataract surgery who were bilaterally implanted with two different trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with a similar optical zone but different haptic shape. METHODS:Twenty-one patients (42 eyes) with cataract and less than 1.50 D of corneal astigmatism underwent implantation of one FineVision/MicoF IOL in one eye and one POD FineVision IOL in the contralateral eye (PhysIOL, Liège, Belgium) at IOA Madrid Innova Ocular, Madrid, Spain. IOL allocation was random. Outcome measures, all evaluated 3 months postoperatively, included monocular and binocular uncorrected distance (UDVA), corrected distance (CDVA), distance-corrected intermediate (DCIVA), and near (DCNVA) visual acuity (at 80, 40, and 25 cm) under photopic conditions, refraction, IOL centration, haptic rotation, dysphotopsia, objective quality of vision and aberration quantification, patient satisfaction, and spectacle independence.RESULTS: Three months postoperatively, mean monocular UDVA, CDVA, DCIVA, and DCNVA (40 cm) under photopic conditions were 0.04 ± 0.07, 0.01 ± 0.04, 0.15 ± 0.11, and 0.16 ± 0.08 logMAR for the eyes implanted with the POD FineVision IOL and 0.03 ± 0.05, 0.01 ± 0.02, 0.17 ± 0.12, and 0.14 ± 0.08 logMAR for those receiving the FineVision/MicroF IOL. Moreover, the POD FineVision IOL showed similar centration (P > .05) and better rotational stability (P < .05) than the FineVision/MicroF IOL. Regarding halos,...

show abstract

Visual outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of a +3.00 D or +4.00 D aspheric diffractive multifocal intraocular lens: Comparative study

Abstract: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

Cited by 66 publications

References 32 publications

Visual outcomes after implantation of a novel refractive toric multifocal intraocular lens

Visual outcomes after implantation of a novel refractive toric multifocal intraocular lens

Disk halo size measured in individuals with monofocal versus diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses

Stability of a Novel Intraocular Lens Design: Comparison of Two Trifocal Lenses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About