Voltar
Artigo Revisado por pares
BIBTEX RIS

Visual Acuity, Contrast Sensitivity, Subjective Quality of Vision, and Quality of Life with 4 Different Multifocal IOLs

2011; SAGE Publishing; Volume: 22; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.5301/ejo.2011.8371

ISSN

1724-6016

Autores

Miguel Á. Gil, Consuelo Varón, Noemí Roselló, Genı́s Cardona, José A. Buil,

Tópico(s)

Corneal surgery and disorders

Resumo

Purpose This prospective, randomized, double-masked, clinical trial was designed to evaluate visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, subjective quality of vision, and quality of life in 47 patients symmetrically, and randomly, implanted with 4 different IOL designs (SN6AD1, SN60D3, ReZoom NXG1, and Tecnis ZMA00), 3 months after cataract intervention. Methods Binocular corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity, binocular distance corrected (BCNVA) and uncorrected (UCNVA) near visual acuity, binocular distance corrected (BCIVA) and uncorrected (UCIVA) intermediate visual acuity, photopic, mesopic, and mesopic with glare contrast sensitivity, quality of vision, and quality of life were evaluated. Results Statistically and clinically significant differences were found in BCNVA and UCNVA at 33 cm between high and low add power IOLs, while diffractive SN6AD1 lenses achieved better UCNVA at 40 cm than refractive ReZoom IOLs. Asphericity and low add power were found to improve BCIVA. Contrast sensitivity was similarly compromised in all IOL models, although diffractive optics and aspheric profiles performed better in mesopic conditions. All IOL types received similar overall satisfaction and quality of life scores. Whereas ReZoom patients depended on their spectacles for near tasks, intermediate vision was spectacle independent. Photic phenomena were present in all IOLs, albeit more frequent in ReZoom IOLs. Conclusions The present results, which reflect IOL characteristics in optics, profile, and add power, may contribute to help surgeons decide on the type of IOL most suitable for each patient, especially those with high visual demands at near and intermediate distances.

Referência(s)