Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde · 2013
[Comparison of dysphotopsia effects in phakic and pseudophakic eyes using Rostock glare perimeter].
Сравнительное исследованиеАннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание 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.
Meikies D, van der Mooren M, Guthoff R F, Stachs O
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Pseudophakic dysphotopsia as unwanted side effect after cataract surgery are becoming increasingly important. The so-called glare perimetry allows a realistic quantification of these phenomena. The article presents the method on the example of healthy subjects and pseudophakic patients.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using glare perimetry phakic and pseudophakic subjects were examined for differences in disability glare. For this, data from 60 phakic persons of different ages (45 ± 17.1 years) were used. As pseudophakic subjects 31 carriers of monofocal lenses (70 ± 6.7 years) and 25 carriers of multifocal lenses (71 ± 8.5 years) were tested.
RESULTS: Disability glare was significantly smaller in the phakic group (1.00 ± 0.336°) than in the pseudophakic group (1.56 ± 0.622°). Among the pseudophakic eyes those with a multifocal lens (1.69 ± 0.367°) were significantly more sensitive to glare than those with a monofocal lens (1.43 ± 0.492°).
CONCLUSION: Glare perimetry allows an objective quantification of effects of dysphotopsia under realistic conditions. Pseudophakic eyes show a higher sensitivity to glare than eyes with the natural clear lens. Here, eyes with multifocal lenses prove to be particularly sensitive to glare.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using glare perimetry phakic and pseudophakic subjects were examined for differences in disability glare. For this, data from 60 phakic persons of different ages (45 ± 17.1 years) were used. As pseudophakic subjects 31 carriers of monofocal lenses (70 ± 6.7 years) and 25 carriers of multifocal lenses (71 ± 8.5 years) were tested.
RESULTS: Disability glare was significantly smaller in the phakic group (1.00 ± 0.336°) than in the pseudophakic group (1.56 ± 0.622°). Among the pseudophakic eyes those with a multifocal lens (1.69 ± 0.367°) were significantly more sensitive to glare than those with a monofocal lens (1.43 ± 0.492°).
CONCLUSION: Glare perimetry allows an objective quantification of effects of dysphotopsia under realistic conditions. Pseudophakic eyes show a higher sensitivity to glare than eyes with the natural clear lens. Here, eyes with multifocal lenses prove to be particularly sensitive to glare.