کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
4017411 | 1261976 | 2011 | 7 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
PurposeTo evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of the new low-addition (add) (+3.00 diopter [D]) ReSTOR multifocal IOL compared with the preceding ReSTOR model with +4.00 D add.SettingUniversity Eye Hospital, Tuebingen, Germany.DesignComparative case series.MethodsPatients with a +3.00 D or +4.00 D add multifocal IOL were examined for uncorrected and distance-corrected visual acuity at distance, intermediate, and near. A defocus profile was assessed, individual reading distance and the distance for lowest intermediate visual acuity were determined. Patient satisfaction was evaluated with a standardized questionnaire. Contrast sensitivity was tested under mesopic and photopic conditions.ResultsUncorrected and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuities were statistically significantly better in the +3.00 D add group (24 eyes) than in the +4.00 D add group (30 eyes); distance and near visual acuities were not different between groups. The defocus profile significantly varied between groups. The +4.00 D add group had a closer reading distance (33.0 cm) than the +3.00 D add group (43.5 cm), a closer point of lowest intermediate visual acuity (65.8 cm versus 86.9 cm) and worse lowest intermediate visual acuity (20/59 ± 4.5 letters [SD] versus 20/48 ± 5.5 letters). Thus, patients in the +3.00 D add group reported being more satisfied with intermediate visual acuity. The +3.00 D add group reported more glare but less halos than the +4.00 D add group; contrast sensitivity was not different.ConclusionThe lower addition resulted in a narrower defocus profile, a farther reading distance, and better intermediate visual acuity and thus increased patient satisfaction.Financial DisclosureNo author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned. Additional disclosure is found in the footnotes.
Journal: Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery - Volume 37, Issue 4, April 2011, Pages 720–726