Current eye research · 2022
Evaluation of a Novel Non-Diffractive Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens - First Results from a Prospective Study.
СтатьяПоддержка 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.
Tahmaz Volkan, Siebelmann Sebastian, Koch Konrad R, Cursiefen Claus, Langenbucher Achim, Hoerster Robert
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate a novel hydrophobic, non-diffractive, extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) design in comparison to two monofocal aspheric lenses.
METHODS: Inclusion criteria for this prospective, monocentric cohort study were opacification of the crystalline lens and patients' wishes for surgery. In the case of the EDOF IOL, patients asked for a presbyopia correction. All patients received surgery on both eyes. Corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity (CDVA, UCDVA), uncorrected and distance corrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA, DCIVA) and defocus curves (all monocular and binocular) were compared three months postoperatively.
RESULTS: Fifty-six eyes were implanted with an EDOF IOL (LuxSmartTM, Bausch & Lomb GmbH, Berlin, Germany), 50 eyes with a monofocal aspheric IOL: 32 eyes with a clear IOL (Polylens® AS 61, Polytech Domilens, Roßdorf, Germany), 16 eyes with a yellow IOL (iSert® 251, Hoya Surgical Optics GmbH, Frankfurt, Germany). Three months postoperatively, UCDVA was comparable with the EDOF IOL, versus the monofocal IOL (P > 0.9). Binocular DCIVA in the EDOF IOL was significantly higher than in the monofocal IOL (P = 0.001). Monocular DCIVA better than 20/23 Snellen was achieved in 10% with the monofocal IOL and in 68% (P < 0.0001) with the EDOF IOL. Defocus curves showed a depth of focus at 20/23 Snellen of 1.6 vs. 0.83 diopters (D) in the EDOF IOL, vs. the monofocal IOL. No patient reported halos or starbursts in non-standardized questioning.
CONCLUSION: This non-diffractive EDOF IOL provided comparably high UCDVA and significantly higher DCIVA than the mono-focal lenses, causing only mild optical phenomena.
METHODS: Inclusion criteria for this prospective, monocentric cohort study were opacification of the crystalline lens and patients' wishes for surgery. In the case of the EDOF IOL, patients asked for a presbyopia correction. All patients received surgery on both eyes. Corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity (CDVA, UCDVA), uncorrected and distance corrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA, DCIVA) and defocus curves (all monocular and binocular) were compared three months postoperatively.
RESULTS: Fifty-six eyes were implanted with an EDOF IOL (LuxSmartTM, Bausch & Lomb GmbH, Berlin, Germany), 50 eyes with a monofocal aspheric IOL: 32 eyes with a clear IOL (Polylens® AS 61, Polytech Domilens, Roßdorf, Germany), 16 eyes with a yellow IOL (iSert® 251, Hoya Surgical Optics GmbH, Frankfurt, Germany). Three months postoperatively, UCDVA was comparable with the EDOF IOL, versus the monofocal IOL (P > 0.9). Binocular DCIVA in the EDOF IOL was significantly higher than in the monofocal IOL (P = 0.001). Monocular DCIVA better than 20/23 Snellen was achieved in 10% with the monofocal IOL and in 68% (P < 0.0001) with the EDOF IOL. Defocus curves showed a depth of focus at 20/23 Snellen of 1.6 vs. 0.83 diopters (D) in the EDOF IOL, vs. the monofocal IOL. No patient reported halos or starbursts in non-standardized questioning.
CONCLUSION: This non-diffractive EDOF IOL provided comparably high UCDVA and significantly higher DCIVA than the mono-focal lenses, causing only mild optical phenomena.