Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2024
Comparison of visual outcomes of bilateral dual-technology diffractive intraocular lens vs blended enhanced monofocal with dual-technology intraocular lens.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hida Wilson Takashi, Moscovici Bernardo Kaplan, Cortez Cesar Martins, Colombo-Barboza Guilherme Novoa, Tzelikis Patrick Frensel de Moraes, Motta Antonio Francisco Pimenta, De Medeiros Andre Lins, Nose Walton, Carricondo Pedro Carlos
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes after implantation of TECNIS Synergy (ZFR00V) intraocular lenses (IOLs) in both eyes and implantation of the TECNIS Synergy and TECNIS Eyhance (ICB00) combination in patients undergoing cataract surgery.
SETTING: Department of Cataract, Hospital Oftalmológico de Brasilia (HOB), Brasília, Brazil.
DESIGN: Prospective, interventional, randomized, parallel-group study.
METHODS: Patients were categorized into 2 groups: Group 1: ZFR00V IOL was implanted in both eyes. Group 2: An ICB00 IOL was implanted in the dominant eye, and a ZFR00V IOL was implanted in the nondominant eye.
RESULTS: Visual acuity was similar between the 2 groups (95% CI <0.1 logMAR). A superior visual acuity of ≥ 20/25 (at -2.00 to -2.50 diopters [D]) was achieved in Group 1 (bilateral ZFR00V) than in Group 2 (combination of ZFR00V/ICB00). The binocular defocus curve demonstrated better visual acuity at 40 cm (-2.00 D) and 50 cm (-2.50 D) in Group 1 than in Group 2 ( P < .05). Similar contrast sensitivity values were observed between the 2 groups. Patients in Group 1 reported higher satisfaction (completely satisfied) than those in Group 2 ( P < .05). However, halos and glare were more pronounced in Group 1 than in Group 2 ( P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: Both presbyopia-correcting IOL combinations showed similar binocular visual acuity results. Group 1 demonstrated enhanced visual acuity in the defocus curve at 40 cm (-2.00 D) and 50 cm (-2.50 D). Comparable contrast sensitivity outcomes were observed in both groups. Patients were more completely satisfied in Group 1 than in Group 2, despite the higher frequency of postoperative nighttime halos and glare.
SETTING: Department of Cataract, Hospital Oftalmológico de Brasilia (HOB), Brasília, Brazil.
DESIGN: Prospective, interventional, randomized, parallel-group study.
METHODS: Patients were categorized into 2 groups: Group 1: ZFR00V IOL was implanted in both eyes. Group 2: An ICB00 IOL was implanted in the dominant eye, and a ZFR00V IOL was implanted in the nondominant eye.
RESULTS: Visual acuity was similar between the 2 groups (95% CI <0.1 logMAR). A superior visual acuity of ≥ 20/25 (at -2.00 to -2.50 diopters [D]) was achieved in Group 1 (bilateral ZFR00V) than in Group 2 (combination of ZFR00V/ICB00). The binocular defocus curve demonstrated better visual acuity at 40 cm (-2.00 D) and 50 cm (-2.50 D) in Group 1 than in Group 2 ( P < .05). Similar contrast sensitivity values were observed between the 2 groups. Patients in Group 1 reported higher satisfaction (completely satisfied) than those in Group 2 ( P < .05). However, halos and glare were more pronounced in Group 1 than in Group 2 ( P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: Both presbyopia-correcting IOL combinations showed similar binocular visual acuity results. Group 1 demonstrated enhanced visual acuity in the defocus curve at 40 cm (-2.00 D) and 50 cm (-2.50 D). Comparable contrast sensitivity outcomes were observed in both groups. Patients were more completely satisfied in Group 1 than in Group 2, despite the higher frequency of postoperative nighttime halos and glare.