SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Glokom Katarakt / 2009 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2

AcrySof® restor göz içi lenslerin görme kalitesi üzerindeki etkileri

The effects of acrysof® restor intraocular lenses on visual quality

Nusret ÖZDEMİR
Havva Gül ÖZDEMİR
Pages
109–111
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Fort Worth, TX) IOLs.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: To compare the modulation transfer function (MTF), the root mean square (RMS) of higher order aberrations, and the point-spread function (PSF) values in 20 eyes in which multifocal apodized diffractive intraocular lenses (IOLs) (AcrySof® ReSTOR) and monofocal IOLs (AcrySof® Natural) were implanted.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: In this comparative and prospective study, 10 patients (20 eyes) who underwent cataract surgery using phacoemulsification and IOL implantation were included.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Fort Worth, TX) IOLs.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the modulation transfer function (MTF), the root mean square (RMS) of higher order aberrations, and the point-spread function (PSF) values in 20 eyes in which multifocal apodized diffractive intraocular lenses (IOLs) (AcrySof® ReSTOR) and monofocal IOLs (AcrySof® Natural) were implanted. Materials and Methods: In this comparative and prospective study, 10 patients (20 eyes) who underwent cataract surgery using phacoemulsification and IOL implantation were included. Two types of IOLs were used in this study. In Group 1 AcrySof® ReSTOR diffractive IOLs (model SN60D3, Alcon Research Ltd. Fort Worth, TX) were used, and in Group 2 AcrySof® Natural monofocal IOLs (model SN60AT, Alcon Research Ltd. Fort Worth, TX) were used. Mean age of the patients was 67.6±2.7 and 58.8±4.3 in Group 1 and Group 2, respectively. At the fourth postoperative week, PSF, MTF, and RMS measurements were obtained by Nidek optical pathway difference (OPD)-Scan (Nidek Co. Ltd. Jp.). Results: Postoperative uncorrected visual acuities in all the eyes were 20/20. In Group 1 postoperative mean values were as follows: MTF: 0.426±0.165; PSF: 0.055±0.066; RMS 0.766±0.494. In Group 2 postoperative mean values were as follows: MTF: 0.388±0.168; PSF: 0.077±0.121; RMS: 0.899±0.616. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative PSF, MTF, or RMS values between the two groups. Conclusion: There was no significant difference in the visual quality outcome in terms of MTF, PSF, or RMS values in the eyes with AcrySof® ReSTOR diffractive (SN60D3, Alcon Research Ltd. Fort Worth, TX) and AcrySof® Natural monofocal (SN60AT, Alcon Research Ltd. Fort Worth, TX) IOLs.

Özet

Amaç: Multifokal apodize difraktif göz içi lens (AcrySof® ReSTOR) ve monofokal göz içi lens (AcrySof® Natural) yerleştirilmiş hastaların MTF (modulation transfer function), RMS (root mean square of higher order aberrations) ve PSF (point-spread function) değerlerinin karşılaştırması. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu karşılaştırmalı ve prospektif çalışmada 10 hastanın 20 gözüne fakoemülsifikasyon ve intraoküler lens implantasyonu yapıldı. Bu çalışmada iki tip intraoküler lens kullanıldı. Grup 1’de AcrySof® ReSTOR difraktif GİL (model SN60D3, Alcon Research Ltd. Fort Worth, TX), Grup 2’de AcrySof® Natural monofokal GİL (model SN60AT, Alcon Research Ltd. Fort Worth, TX) kullanıldı. Hastaların yaş ortalaması Grup 1’de 67.6±2.7, Grup 2’de 58.8±4.3 idi. Postoperatif 4. haftada PSF, MTF ve RMS ölçümleri Nidek OPD (optical pathway difference)- Scan (Nidek Co. Ltd. Jp.) ile yapıldı. Bulgular: Ameliyat sonrasında bütün hastaların tashihsiz görme keskinliği tamdı. Grup 1’de ameliyat sonrası ortalama değerler şöyleydi: MTF: 0.426±0.165; PSF: 0.055±0.066; RMS 0.766±0.494. Grup 2’de ameliyat sonrası ortalama değerler şöyleşdi: MTF: 0.388±0.168; PSF:0.077±0.121; RMS: 0.899±0.616. İki grup arasında, ameliyat sonrası PSF, MTF ve RMS değerleri bakımından istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark yoktu. Sonuç: Mültifokal apodize difraktif göz içi lens (AcrySof® ReSTOR) ve monofokal göz içi lens (AcrySof® Natural) uygulanan gözler arasında nihai görme kalitesinde MTF, PSF ve RMS değerleri açısından anlamlı bir fark saptanmadı.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZDEMİR, N., ÖZDEMİR, H. G. (2009). AcrySof® restor göz içi lenslerin görme kalitesi üzerindeki etkileri. Glokom Katarakt, Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2, 109–111. https://ajindex.com/articles/226909

References (10)

  1. Leyland M, Zinicola E.: Multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses in cataract surgery. A systematic review. Ophthalmology. 2003;100:1789-1798
  2. Rocha KM, Chalita MR, Souza CEB et al.: Postoperative wavefront analysis and contrast sensitivity of multifocal apodized difractive IOL (ReSTOR) and three monofocal IOLs. Journal of Refractive Surgery. 2005;21:808-812
  3. Dainty JC.: Methods of measuring the modulation transfer function of photographic emulsions. Optica Acta. 1971;11:795-813
  4. Bechert CH.: Achieving functional vision. Cataract & Refractive Surgery Today. 2006;33-34
  5. Vilarrodona L, Barrett GD, Johnson B.: High-order aberrations in pseudophakia with different intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004;30:571-575
  6. Uchio E, Ohno S, Kusakawa T.: Spherical aberrations and glare disability with intraocular lenses of different optical design. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1995;21:690-696
  7. Pacher M, Fine IH, Hoffman RS.: Wavefront technology in cataract surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2004;15:56-60
  8. Miller JM, Anwaruddin R, Straub J, et al.: Higher order aberrations in normal, dilated intraocular lens, and laser in situ keratomileusis corneas. J Refract Surg. 2002;18:579-583
  9. Werner L, Mamalis N.: Wavefront corrections intraocular lenses Ophthalmol Clin North Am. 2004;17:233-245
  10. Kohnen T, Allen D, Boureau C, et al.: European multicenter study of the AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive intraocular lenses. Ophthalmology. 2006;113:578-584.