Canadian journal of ophthalmology. Journal canadien d'ophtalmologie · 2022
Clinical outcomes of a trifocal compared with an extended depth of focus IOL following bilateral cataract surgery.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Scheepers Marius A, Bunce Catey B, Michaelides Michel, Hall Brad
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the visual and patient reported outcomes of 2 presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs).
METHODS: A total of 134 eyes (67 patients) that underwent cataract surgery with either a trifocal IOL or an extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL bilaterally and were assessed 3 months after surgery. Outcome measures were binocular distance-corrected visual acuity at near (40 cm), intermediate (60 cm), and distance (6 m); Akman modified Quality of Life (QOL) Questionnaire-14; and 10% contrast visual acuity at distance and near, with and without glare.
RESULTS: Mean binocular logMAR visual acuity (VA) for the PanOptix compared with the Symfony lenses: distance-corrected near VA, 0.054 versus 0.228; distance-corrected intermediate VA, 0.019 versus 0.063; and distance-corrected distance VA, -0.016 versus -0.021. The QOL questionnaire showed that 62% of the PanOptix group and 48% of the Symfony group had little or no difficulty with all QOL-related tasks. In a multivariable model controlling for pupil size and angle kappa (chord mu distance, right eyes), the differences were -0.005 (range, -0.03-0.02) and 0.165 (range, 0.12-0.21), respectively. Also, 10% contrast acuity was comparable in the 2 different lenses and was unaffected by glare.
CONCLUSIONS: Binocular distance-corrected near VA was significantly better in the PanOptix group (p < 0.0001). This result remained statistically significant after controlling for pupil size and chord mu distance (p < 0.001). Intermediate and distance VAs were similar between the 2 groups. QOL scores were higher in the PanOptix group.
METHODS: A total of 134 eyes (67 patients) that underwent cataract surgery with either a trifocal IOL or an extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL bilaterally and were assessed 3 months after surgery. Outcome measures were binocular distance-corrected visual acuity at near (40 cm), intermediate (60 cm), and distance (6 m); Akman modified Quality of Life (QOL) Questionnaire-14; and 10% contrast visual acuity at distance and near, with and without glare.
RESULTS: Mean binocular logMAR visual acuity (VA) for the PanOptix compared with the Symfony lenses: distance-corrected near VA, 0.054 versus 0.228; distance-corrected intermediate VA, 0.019 versus 0.063; and distance-corrected distance VA, -0.016 versus -0.021. The QOL questionnaire showed that 62% of the PanOptix group and 48% of the Symfony group had little or no difficulty with all QOL-related tasks. In a multivariable model controlling for pupil size and angle kappa (chord mu distance, right eyes), the differences were -0.005 (range, -0.03-0.02) and 0.165 (range, 0.12-0.21), respectively. Also, 10% contrast acuity was comparable in the 2 different lenses and was unaffected by glare.
CONCLUSIONS: Binocular distance-corrected near VA was significantly better in the PanOptix group (p < 0.0001). This result remained statistically significant after controlling for pupil size and chord mu distance (p < 0.001). Intermediate and distance VAs were similar between the 2 groups. QOL scores were higher in the PanOptix group.