We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Comparison of visual performance after implantation of 3 types of intraocular lenses: accommodative, multifocal, and monofocal.
European Journal of Ophthalmology 2014 September
PURPOSE: To compare the performance of accommodative, multifocal, and monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs).
METHODS: In this clinical control study, 3 types of IOL were implanted in 128 eyes of 86 patients with age-related cataract who underwent phacoemulsification. Accommodative (Tetraflex), multifocal (ZMA00), and monofocal (Akreos Advanced Optics [AO]) IOLs were implanted into 43, 40, and 45 eyes, respectively. The uncorrected, best-corrected distance, contrast sensitivity, and distance-corrected intermediate and near visual acuity (UCDVA, BCDVA, CSVA, DCIVA, and DCNVA, respectively), amplitude of pseudoaccommodation, and patient satisfaction were measured at 1, 3, and 12 months after surgery.
RESULTS: Differences in CSVA at all contrast degrees, UCDVA, and BCDVA among the 3 groups were not significant. Patients in the Akreos AO group exhibited a poorer DCIVA and DCNVA and experienced less pseudoaccommodation compared to patients in the other 2 groups at 3 and 12 months after surgery (p<0.01). Patients in the ZMA00 group exhibited a better DCIVA and experienced more pseudoaccommodation than patients in the Tetraflex group (3 months: p<0.05, 12 months: p<0.01 for both outcomes). Three months after surgery, total spectacle independence was achieved by 84.4%, 60.7%, and 17.2% of the ZMA00, Tetraflex, and Akreos AO group patients, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: All 3 types of IOLs allowed greater distance visual acuity; however, multifocal IOLs produced better DCIVA and DCNVA and more pseudoaccommodation and spectacle independence. Accommodative IOLs ranked second. Neither accommodative nor multifocal IOLs reduced CSVA.
METHODS: In this clinical control study, 3 types of IOL were implanted in 128 eyes of 86 patients with age-related cataract who underwent phacoemulsification. Accommodative (Tetraflex), multifocal (ZMA00), and monofocal (Akreos Advanced Optics [AO]) IOLs were implanted into 43, 40, and 45 eyes, respectively. The uncorrected, best-corrected distance, contrast sensitivity, and distance-corrected intermediate and near visual acuity (UCDVA, BCDVA, CSVA, DCIVA, and DCNVA, respectively), amplitude of pseudoaccommodation, and patient satisfaction were measured at 1, 3, and 12 months after surgery.
RESULTS: Differences in CSVA at all contrast degrees, UCDVA, and BCDVA among the 3 groups were not significant. Patients in the Akreos AO group exhibited a poorer DCIVA and DCNVA and experienced less pseudoaccommodation compared to patients in the other 2 groups at 3 and 12 months after surgery (p<0.01). Patients in the ZMA00 group exhibited a better DCIVA and experienced more pseudoaccommodation than patients in the Tetraflex group (3 months: p<0.05, 12 months: p<0.01 for both outcomes). Three months after surgery, total spectacle independence was achieved by 84.4%, 60.7%, and 17.2% of the ZMA00, Tetraflex, and Akreos AO group patients, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: All 3 types of IOLs allowed greater distance visual acuity; however, multifocal IOLs produced better DCIVA and DCNVA and more pseudoaccommodation and spectacle independence. Accommodative IOLs ranked second. Neither accommodative nor multifocal IOLs reduced CSVA.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app