Dergiler / Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences / 2016 / Cilt: 46 - Sayı: 3

Clinical outcomes and optical performance of four differentmultifocal intraocular lenses

Sayfa
597–603
Yayın Tarihi
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusion: All four multifocal lens designs provided satisfactory visual functions and CS results in patients who fulfilled the criteria for multifocal lens implantation.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Background/aim: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and optical performance of 4 different multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs).
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Materials and methods: Ninety eyes of 51 patients who received Reviol MFM 611, Reviol MFM 625, Acri.LISA, and ReSTOR SN6AD3 multifocal IOLs after cataract surgery were retrospectively evaluated.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusion: All four multifocal lens designs provided satisfactory visual functions and CS results in patients who fulfilled the criteria for multifocal lens implantation.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Background/aim: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and optical performance of 4 different multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). Materials and methods: Ninety eyes of 51 patients who received Reviol MFM 611, Reviol MFM 625, Acri.LISA, and ReSTOR SN6AD3 multifocal IOLs after cataract surgery were retrospectively evaluated. The patients were similar in terms of age, sex, cataract hardness and axial length. The mean outcome measures were uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA, CDVA), distance-corrected intermediate and near visual acuity (DCIVA, DCNVA), intra or postoperative complications, and contrast sensitivity (CS) results under mesopic conditions. The mean follow up period was 10.5 months (range: 6 12 months). Results: All cases were within ± 0.75 D of emmetropia. Postoperative increase in UDVA and DCNVA was statistically significant in all groups. The Acri.LISA group showed slightly lower DCIVA compared with the other IOLs. CS was clinically similar between the groups. None of the patients developed any early or late postoperative complication or neuroadaptation problem, which necessitated explantation of the lens. Conclusion: All four multifocal lens designs provided satisfactory visual functions and CS results in patients who fulfilled the criteria for multifocal lens implantation.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

UYSAL, B. S., CERAN, B. B., DEMİROK, G., CAN, İ., TAKMAZ, T. (2022). Clinical outcomes and optical performance of four differentmultifocal intraocular lenses. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, Cilt: 46 - Sayı: 3, 597–603. https://ajindex.com/articles/610748

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (14)

  1. Mester U, Hunold W, Wesendahl T, Kaymak H. Functional outcomes after implantation of Tecnis ZM900 and Array SA40 multifocal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refr Surg 2007; 33: 1033-1040
  2. Zelichowska B, Re Mickas M, Stankiewicz A, Cervino A, Montes-Mico R. Apodized diffractive versus refractive multifocal intraocular lenses: optical and visual evaluation. J Cataract Refr Surg 2008; 34: 2036-2042
  3. Alfonso JF, Fernandez-Vega L, Baamonde MB, MontesMico R. Prospective visual evaluation of apodized diffractive intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refr Surg 2007; 33: 1235-1243
  4. Chylack LT, Wolfe JK, Singer DM. The lens opacities classification system III. Arch Ophthalmol 1993; 111: 831-836
  5. Richter-Mueksch S, Weghaupt H, Skorpik C, Velikay-Parel M, Radner W. Reading performance with a refractive multifocal and a diffractive bifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refr Surg 2002; 28: 1957-1963
  6. Alio JL, Radner W, Plaza-Puche AB, Ortiz D, Neipp MC, QuilesnMJ, Rodriguez-Marin J. Design of short Spanish sentences for measuring reading performance: Radner-Vissum test. J Cataract Refr Surg 2008; 34: 638-642
  7. Radner W, Obermayer W, Richter-Mueksch S, Willinger U, Velikay-Parel M, Eisenwort B. The validity and reliability of short German sentences for measuring reading speed. Graefes Arch Clin Exp 2002; 240: 461-467
  8. Heutz WW, Eckhardt HB, Reohrig B, Grolmus R. Reading ability with 3 multifocal intraocular lens models. J Cataract Refr Surg 2006; 32: 2015-2021
  9. Rodriguez-Galietero A, Monte´s-Mico´ R, Munoz G, Albarran- Diego C. Comparison of contrast sensitivity and color discrimination after clear and yellow intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refr Surg 2005; 31: 1736-1740
  10. Rodriguez-Galietero A, Montes-Mico R, Munoz G, AlbarranDiego C. Blue-light filtering intraocular lens patients with diabetes: contrast sensitivity and chromatic discrimination. J Cataract Refr Surg 2005; 31: 2088-2092
  11. Alfonso JF, Fernandez-Vega L, Valcarcel B, Montes-Mico R. Visual performances after Acrysof ReSTOR aspheric intraocular lens implantation. J Optom 2008; 1: 30-35
  12. Alfonso JF, Fernandez L, Puchades C, Montes,Mico R. Intermediate visual function with different multifocal intraocular lens models. J Cataract Refr Surg 2010; 36: 733- 739
  13. Alfonso J, Fernandez-Vega L, Senaris A, Montes-Mico R. Prospective study of the Acri.LISA bifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refr Surg 2007; 33: 1930-1935
  14. Kaymak H, Mester U. First results with a new aberration