Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

17 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Comparing the visual outcome, visual quality, and satisfaction among three types of multi-focal intraocular lenses.

ABSTRACT: This study compared the visual outcome, visual quality, and satisfaction following implantation of the Mix-and-Match bifocal IOLs (+ 2.75 D and + 3.25 D add power Tecnis Multifocal Model), EDOF IOL (Tecnis Symfony IOL), and Trifocal IOL (FineVision PodFT, PhysIOL). All outcomes were compared among the three groups. The manifest refraction indicated that the EDOF group had significantly higher myopic spherical equivalent values than did the others. In the terms of visual acuity, there were no significant differences in far or intermediate visual acuity among the three groups. Only in near (33 cm), the EDOF group had significantly worse binocular visual acuity than did the Trifocal group (p = 0.002). Regarding to defocus curve, the Trifocal group had better defocus curves at near distances (- 2.0 to - 3.5 D; p = 0.001 vs. EDOF) than did the other two groups. In contrast sensitivity test, the EDOF group had relatively lower value than did the other two groups. In reading speed, only at 0.3 logMAR (6.5-point font), Mix-and-Match group had a significantly higher reading speed than did the other two groups (p = < 0.001 vs. EDOF, p = 0.007 vs. Trifocal). also Mix-and-Match group showed significantly fewer visual artifacts. There were no differences between the three groups in terms of patient satisfaction.ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT04019691.

SUBMITTER: Paik DW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7481789 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Relationship Between Postoperative Intraocular Lens Shift and Postoperative Refraction Change in Cataract Surgery Using Three Different Types of Intraocular Lenses.

Project description:IntroductionUnderstanding the relationship between postoperative intraocular lens (IOL) shift and refractive change is crucial for the accuracy of predicted postoperative refraction (PPR). We assessed the relationships between different IOL fixation methods, haptic designs, and several metrics.MethodsSingle-center, open-label study which included 69 eyes. We preoperatively measured the anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), axial length (AL), and PPR. AcrySof IQ (n = 27) and FineVision (n = 24) were fixed in the bag, and FEMTIS (n = 18) was fixed in capsulorhexis. At 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month postoperatively, we checked the IOL position and refraction and compared the IOL shift, refraction change, and the margin of error of the predicted PPR (PR-PPR difference). We also analyzed the correlation between postoperative and preoperative variables.ResultsFEMTIS showed the highest stability in terms of IOL shift and refraction. The in-the-bag-fixated IOLs showed a significant forward shift between 1 day and 1 week postoperatively. There were significant differences in the PR-PPR difference between the IOLs. ACD and AL showed significant positive correlations, and LT showed a significant negative correlation with IOL shift and change in PR between 1 day and 1 week, but not between 1 week and 1 month postoperatively.ConclusionThe relationship between postoperative IOL shift and refraction change varied according to IOLs with different haptic types. Capsulorhexis fixation may be more stable than in-the-bag fixation. Furthermore, preoperative ACD, LT, and AL may be useful factors to predict IOL shift, change in PR, and to a lesser extent the degree of the margin of error in clinical practice. Our findings may improve the accuracy of PPR and refractive outcomes.

| S-EPMC8589915 | biostudies-literature

Influence of extended depth of focus intraocular lenses on visual field sensitivity.

Project description:PurposeTo investigate the influence of EDOF IOLs, TECNIS Symfony® (Johnson & Johnson Surgical Vision, Inc.), on visual field sensitivity and to compare the IOLs with other kinds of IOLs.MethodsThe subjects included the normal fellow eyes of patients who underwent the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) 30-2 with Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm Fast within 6 months after cataract due to glaucoma or suspected glaucoma. Each parameter of HFA was compared among eyes implanted with TENIS Symfony® (EDOF group), diffractive bifocal IOLs (bifocal group), and monofocal IOLs (monofocal group).ResultsThe total of 76 eyes, including 24 eyes in the EDOF group, 26 eyes in the bifocal group, and 26 eyes in the monofocal group, were included in this study. Mean deviation (MD) of HFA was -0.24±0.58 dB in the EDOF group, -1.38±0.58 dB in the bifocal group, and 0.02±0.44 dB in the monofocal group. Foveal threshold (FT) of HFA was 35.8±1.6 dB in the EDOF group, 33.6±1.7 dB in the bifocal group, and 36.6±1.4 dB in the monofocal group. In both MD and FT, there was significant difference between the bifocal group and the others (p<0.001). There was no difference between the EDOF group and the monofocal group. Moreover, there was no significant difference between the three groups about pattern standard deviation (PSD) of HFA.ConclusionTECNIS Symfony® may have little influence on visual field sensitivity, whereas diffractive bifocal IOLs decrease visual field sensitivity.

| S-EPMC7489530 | biostudies-literature

Drug-Eluting Intraocular Lenses.

Project description:Notable advances in materials science and in surgical techniques make the management of cataract by replacement of the opaque crystalline with an intraocular lens (IOL), one of the most cost-effective interventions in current healthcare. The usefulness and safety of IOLs can be enhanced if they are endowed with the ability to load and to sustain drug release in the implantation site. Drug-eluting IOLs can prevent infections and untoward reactions of eye tissues (which lead to opacification) and also can act as drug depots for treatment of several other ocular pathologies. Such a myriad of therapeutic possibilities has prompted the design of drug-IOL combination products. Several approaches are under study, namely combination of the IOL with an insert in a single device, soaking in drug solutions, impregnation using supercritical fluids, coating with drug/polymer layers, and covalent grafting of the drug. The advantages/limitations of each technique are discussed in the present review on selected examples. Although more in vivo data are required, the information already available proves the interest of some approaches in ocular therapeutics.

| S-EPMC5448846 | biostudies-other

Trifocal intraocular lenses versus bifocal intraocular lenses after cataract extraction among participants with presbyopia.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC7388867 | biostudies-literature

A comparison of visual outcome and rotational stability of two types of toric implantable collamer lenses (TICL) : V4 versus V4c.

Project description:PurposeTo compare the efficacy and rotational stability after implantation of two types of toric implantable collamer lenses (Toric ICL™(TICL);V4 and V4c, STAAR Surgical Co.).Study designRetrospective case series.MethodsThis retrospective study evaluated total 48 eyes of 48 patients who underwent the implantation with V4 and V4c TICL with a central hole; A twenty-four eyes of 24 patients with V4 TICL and 24 eyes of 24 patients with V4c TICL with a central hole. Visual acuity, manifest refraction, and intraocular pressure were evaluated before and after surgery. Rotational stability (disparity between the intended axis and achieved axis) was assessed in both groups using digital anterior segment photographs, and vector analysis was also performed.ResultsUncorrected visual acuity improved in both groups without significant difference (P = .111). There were no statistical differences between two groups in postoperative SE and cylindrical errors (P = .067 and .384, respectively). The mean value of rotation was 4.17±3.31° and 3.39±2.36° in the V4 and V4c TICL groups, respectively without significant difference (P = .364). Vector analysis of astigmatic correction showed no significant diffrence between two groups.ConclusionV4 and V4c TICL have similar efficacy with regard to visual acuity and refractive outcomes and rotational stability.

| S-EPMC5573270 | biostudies-literature

Patient-Reported Outcomes/Satisfaction and Spectacle Independence with Blended or Bilateral Multifocal Intraocular Lenses in Cataract Surgery.

Project description:Purpose:To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and satisfaction results after multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in three groups: two receiving bilateral implantation of the same IOL and another undergoing blended vision with two different multifocal IOLs. Patients and methods:A questionnaire was administered to patients who had undergone uncomplicated cataract surgery and 2 months of follow-up: the first group underwent bilateral implantation with Alcon's AcrySof ReSTOR 3.0 lens ("3.0/3.0," n=78); the second group underwent implantation with the ReSTOR ActiveFocus 2.5 or the ReSTOR ActiveFocus 2.5 toric lens ("2.5 mini-monovision," n=102); and the third group underwent implantation with the ReSTOR 2.5 lens in the dominant eye and the ReSTOR 3.0 lens in the non-dominant eye ("2.5/3.0," n=89). Results:Overall PROs and satisfaction was similar among the groups. Refractive outcomes and accuracy were similar among the groups, but the 2.5 mini-monovision group reported better intermediate vision. Refractive outcome differences were not meaningful among the groups and were not a differentiating factor in PROs. Substantially fewer patients in the 2.5 mini-monovision group noticed glare and halo compared with the 3.0/3.0 group (P<0.0001, chi-square test). No new safety concerns were reported. Conclusion:The 2.5 mini-monovision results in a higher percentage of patients being satisfied with intermediate vision than bilateral ReSTOR 3.0 or blended vision with ReSTOR 2.5/3.0 implants, but overall PRO differences were not statistically significant.

| S-EPMC6938179 | biostudies-literature

Laboratory Investigation of Preclinical Visual-Quality Metrics and Halo-Size in Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lenses.

Project description:IntroductionThis study aims to compare preclinical visual-quality metrics and halo size of intraocular lenses (IOL) with enhanced intermediate vision to a standard monofocal lens.MethodsThree monofocal- IOL models with an extended-depth-of-focus (EDoF) intended for monocular implantation (Tecnis ICB00, AE2UV/ZOE, and IsoPure) and one for monovision (RayOne EMV) were compared against a standard monofocal lens (Tecnis ZCB00). An optical-metrology station was used in the assessment of IOLs' optical quality in polychromatic light. The imaging quality was compared with metrics derived from the optical transfer function. Halo size was estimated from the projection of the point spread function under scotopic pupil.ResultsThe monofocal IOL showed the highest image quality at the far focus. The ICB00's, the AE2UV/ZOE's, and the IsoPure's performance at - 1D was superior to that of the monofocal lens. The monocular defocus tolerance of the RayOne EMV was comparable with that of the ZCB00. The RayOne EMV's intermediate range was improved in a monovision configuration (- 1D offset). This approach, however, yielded the largest halo area, i.e., 53% of the ZCB00's halo, compared to 34% for the IsoPure, 14% for the AE2UV/ZOE, and 8% for the ICB00.ConclusionThe mono-EDoF models have a clear advantage over the standard monofocal lens by expanded imaging capability beyond - 0.5D. Although the RayOne EMV provided the largest (binocular) visual-range extension, it was at the expense of monocular vision and higher susceptibility to halo. The ICB00's and the AE2UV/ZOE's halo-profile was similar to that of the ZCB00, indicating their low potential to induce photic phenomena.

| S-EPMC8589924 | biostudies-literature

A prospective, randomised comparison of single and three piece acrylic foldable intraocular lenses.

Project description:AIMS: To compare the postoperative performance of single and three piece acrylic foldable intraocular lenses (IOLs). METHODS: 20 patients underwent bilateral cataract surgery with a single piece SA30AL IOL in one eye and a three piece MA30BA IOL in the other eye. The eyes were randomly assigned to either a single or three piece lens. The amount of IOL decentration and tilt, area of anterior capsule opening, and degree of posterior capsule opacification were measured using the Scheimpflug anterior segment analysis system (Nidek EAS-1000). Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity were examined. Measurements were performed by masked examiners before and 1 day, 1 week, 1, 3, 6, and 18 months after surgery. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups (p>0.05, paired t test) in the amount of IOL decentration, IOL tilt, area of anterior capsule opening, degree of posterior capsule opacification, best corrected visual acuity, and contrast sensitivity throughout the 18 month follow up period. CONCLUSION: The single and three piece acrylic foldable IOLs are equally stable in the eye after surgery.

| S-EPMC1772204 | biostudies-other

Multifocal intraocular lenses and retinal diseases.

Project description:PurposeMultifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs) are often discouraged in patients with or at risk of retinal disorders (including diabetic retinopathy, age-related macular degeneration, and epiretinal membranes), as MIOLs are believed to reduce contrast sensitivity (CS). Concerns with MIOLs have also been raised in individuals with visual field defects, fixation instability or eccentric preferred retinal locations. The aim of this study is to review the influence of MIOL on quality of vision in patients with retinal diseases.MethodsWe reviewed the PubMed and Web of Science databases to identify relevant studies using the following keywords: multifocal intraocular lens, cataract surgery, cataract extraction, lens exchange, diabetic retinopathy, age-related macular degeneration, and contrast sensitivity.ResultsStudies evaluating CS in MIOLs present conflicting results: MIOLs either did not influence CS or resulted in worse performance under low-illuminance conditions and higher spatial frequencies when compared to monofocal IOLs. Nevertheless, MIOLs preserved CS levels within the age-matched normal range. Two studies reported that patients with concurrent retinal diseases receiving a MIOL, both unilaterally and bilaterally, reported a significant improvement in visual-related outcomes. Individuals with a monofocal IOL in one eye and a MIOL in the fellow eye reported greater subjective satisfaction with the MIOL.ConclusionWe were unable to find evidence suggesting that patients with retinal diseases should be advised against MIOLs. Nevertheless, more research is needed to address the aforementioned concerns and to optimize the use of MIOLs in eyes with retinal disease.

| S-EPMC7575463 | biostudies-literature

Comparison of visual outcomes after bilateral implantation of two intraocular lenses with distinct diffractive optics.

Project description:Purpose:The aim of this study was to compare the visual outcomes and subjective visual quality between bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus intraocular lens, J&J Vision Tecnis Symfony® ZXR00 (Group A) and bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens, Alcon Acrysof IQ PanOptix® TNFT00 (Group B). Methods:This prospective, nonrandomized, comparative study of consecutive cases assessed 52 eyes of 26 patients operated on by the same surgeon (WTH) and binocularly implanted with multifocal intraocular lenses between May 2016 and July 2018. Binocular visual acuity for far, intermediate and near was tested in all cases. Ophthalmological evaluation included the measurement of binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) at 40 cm, uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) at 70 cm, monocular visual defocus curve and the quality of life (QoL) questionnaire, National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire - 25 ( NEI-VFQ 25). Results:Postoperative UDVA was 0.00 and 0.09 logMAR (P<0.001), UIVA was 0.20 and 0.39 logMAR (P<0.001) and UNVA was 0.16 and -0.01 logMAR (P<0.001) in groups A and B, respectively; postoperative CDVA was -0.05 and 0.06 logMAR (P<0.001) in groups A and B, respectively. Conclusion:Both groups reported good subjective quality of vision regarding long, intermediate and short distances. Group A had a better performance for binocular UDVA, UIVA at 70 cm and CDVA, while regarding the monocular defocus curve, Group A outperformed Group B for long distances. Furthermore, Group B surpassed it in the short to very short distances, between the range of ≥2.00 D to 5.00 D of vergence. While Group A had a better performance regarding the vergences between 0.00 and 1.00 D (P<0.05) and at the vergence of +2.50 D (P=0.007). Group B outran Group A for UNVA at 40 cm.

| S-EPMC6718244 | biostudies-other

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data