Visual performance of the Tecnis one-piece lens ZCB00

Wahba, Sherine S; Riad, Riad F.; Morkos, Fathy Fawzy; Hassouna, Abdallah K; Roshdy, Maged Maher Salib

doi:10.2147/opth.s27324

Cited by 14 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study an aspheric surface as a possible best-fit surface was proposed to ascertain whether IOL surface designs are spherical, aspherical, or higher-order aspherical. As consequence of this new approach, this study confirmed that the anterior surface of the Tecnis 1 IOL was aspherical and the second one was spherical as several reports have stated 12 , 14 , 15 but not showed (see Fig. 4 A–C).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analysis and comparison of monofocal, extended depth of focus and trifocal intraocular lens profiles

Miret

Camps

García

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To test the feasibility of using profilometers to extract information about IOL surfaces design. A standard monofocal IOL (Tecnis 1), a monofocal IOL that provided some depth of focus (Eyhance), an extended depth of focus IOL based on refractive optics (Mini Well) and a trifocal IOL based on diffractive optics were used in this study (Tecnis Synergy). The surface topography of the IOLs was measured by using a multimode optical profilometer. Posterior surface of Tecnis 1 IOL was spherical and the anterior surface aspherical. In the Eyhance IOL, posterior surface was spherical and anterior surface did not fit to any of our reference surfaces, indicating a higher order aspheric surface design. In the Mini Well Ready IOL, a best-fit sphere surface was obtained for the second surface and a high order aspherical surface design was deduced for the first surface. The anterior surface of the Synergy IOL was aspherical and the base curve of the diffractive structure fitted very well to a spherical surface. To consider an aspheric surface as possible best-fit surface provided more information than if only best-fit spherical surface was considered. The high order aspheric surface designs employed in the IOLs studied presented differences, regarding best-fit asphere surface, higher than 1 micron. These differences were correlated with the generation of spherical aberration complex profiles (with Zernike terms higher than 4th order) and with the production of distinct amounts of depth of focus. This method was also useful to deduce the base curve of diffractive surfaces.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Tecnis 1 ZCB00 IOL (Johnson & Johnson Vision, Inc), is a monofocal biconvex IOL with spherical posterior surface and an anterior aspheric surface that provided a negative SA of − 0.27 μm in an optical zone of 6 mm 12 , 14 , 15 .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis and comparison of monofocal, extended depth of focus and trifocal intraocular lens profiles

Miret

Camps

García

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…e w 13 better, statistically significant DCVA than the Clareon® IOL. Our VA outcomes for the TECNIS® ZCB00 IOL are in line with those reported by other authors (15)(16)(17). On the contrary, the result we obtained for DCVA in the Clareon® IOL group (0.05 Some parameters can help us correlate the patient's perception (i.e., visual quality) with the eye's optical quality : OSI, MTF, SR or LCA.…”

supporting

confidence: 91%

Comparison of visual performance between two aspheric monofocal intraocular lens models

Poyales¹,

Garzón

Rico³

et al. 2021

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To assess the difference in visual acuity and optical quality between two monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) models Material and Methods: Prospective, parallel and randomized clinical study. Sixty patients were implanted bilaterally, 30 per group, with IOL TECNIS® ZCB00 or Clareon® CNA0T0. Visual outcomes obtained at 1 and 3 months after surgery included both uncorrected and corrected monocular distance visual acuity (UCVA and DCVA, respectively), objective index scattering (OSI), modulation transfer function cutoff(MTF), Strehl Ratio (SR), contrast sensitivity (CS) defocus curve, IOL's spherical aberration (SA), and eye's longitudinal chromatic aberration (LCA). Patient's satisfaction was assessed using CatQuest-9SF questionnaire at 3 months postoperatively. Results: Regarding all the parameters assessed, there were statistically significant differences for DCVA (p = .008), OSI (p= .050) and SR (p= .003) between groups. Outcomes related to CS defocus curve showed statistically significant differences for vergences between -0.50 D and +1.00 D (3 mm pupil) and for vergences of 0.00 D and +0,50 D (4.5 mm pupil) between groups. Overall, IOL TECNIS® showed better results regarding visual acuity and optical quality, including a lower LCA result in comparison to Clareon®. Patient's satisfaction evaluated with CatQuest-9SF showed that TECNIS group achieved better outcomes although the differences were statistically significant only for the 'Reading text on television' item (p = 0.027). Conclusion: Both IOL models showed excellent quantity of vision, optical and visual quality as well as high patient's satisfaction after cataract surgery. Despite it, the TECNIS® ZCB00 model did provide slightly better outcomes, yet statistically significant, than the Clareon® CNA0T0

show abstract

“… 9 Especially in context to the present study, where the monofocal IOL implanted was the aspheric and chromatic aberration correcting Tecnis-1 IOL; which is already shown to deliver excellent contrast after cataract surgery. 21 Both the IOLs, being manufactured on the same platform, when implanted together in contralateral eyes result in excellent quality of vision post-op.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual and Refractive Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction Following Implantation of Monofocal IOL in One Eye and ERV IOL in the Contralateral Eye with Mini-Monovision

Brar¹,

Ganesh²,

Arra³

et al. 2021

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Title Visual and refractive outcomes and patient satisfaction following implantation of monofocal intraocular lens in one eye and ERV intraocular lens in the contralateral eye with mini-monovision. Purpose To evaluate the outcomes following implantation of monofocal intraocular lens in one eye and ERV intraocular lens in the contralateral eye with mini-monovision. Methods Twenty-five subjects underwent bilateral cataract surgery, wherein the dominant eye received monofocal Tecnis-1 IOL, while in the contralateral eye received the Tecnis Symphony ERV IOL. The dominant eye was targeted for emmetropia and the non-dominant eye for myopia of −0.50 to −0.75D. Binocular uncorrected and corrected distance (UDVA, CDVA), intermediate (UIVA, CIVA), and near (UNVA, DCNVA) visual acuity; reading speeds, defocus curve and contrast sensitivity were studied at 6 months post-operatively. Results At 6 months post-operatively the mean binocular UDVA, CDVA, UNVA and DCNVA were 0.007±0.07, −0.13±0.06, 0.26±0.09 and 0.44±0.10 LogMAR, respectively. Binocular UIVA and DCIVA at 60 cm were 0.22±0.10 and 0.18±0.08 LogMAR and at 80 cm was 0.16±0.11 and 0.15±0.10 LogMAR, respectively. Mean uncorrected reading speeds evaluated with SRD at 40, 60 and 80 cm were 114.4±6.9, 126.4±7.9 and 123.16±5.8 words per minute. Contrast sensitivity values did not show significant difference for any spatial frequency tested. At 6 months, only 12% (3 patients) reported mild halos. Spectacle independence satisfaction scores were 96%, 100% and 88% for distance, intermediate and near. Conclusion Implantation of monofocal intraocular lens in one eye and ERV intraocular lens in the contralateral with mini-monovision resulted in good outcomes for far and intermediate, and satisfactory outcomes for near vision, with good tolerance to mini-monovision at the end of 6 months.

show abstract

Visual performance of the Tecnis one-piece lens ZCB00

Cited by 14 publications

References 21 publications

Analysis and comparison of monofocal, extended depth of focus and trifocal intraocular lens profiles

Analysis and comparison of monofocal, extended depth of focus and trifocal intraocular lens profiles

Comparison of visual performance between two aspheric monofocal intraocular lens models

Visual and Refractive Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction Following Implantation of Monofocal IOL in One Eye and ERV IOL in the Contralateral Eye with Mini-Monovision

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About