Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2025
Clinical data registry comparing outcomes of two light adjustable lenses.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Doane John, Newsom T Hunter, Slade Stephen, Thompson Vance, Bruns Nicholas, Vukich John
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the clinical performance of the light adjustable lenses (LALs) with the LAL+ with an increased central power to have broader depth of focus (DoF).
SETTING: Private practice clinics.
DESIGN: Prospective, nonrandomized, nonmask, multicenter.
METHODS: Clinical data collection registry of patients bilaterally implanted with the LAL or LAL+. Outcome measures included subjective manifest refraction; monocular corrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuity; binocular uncorrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity; and binocular uncorrected best focus visual acuity at differing contrast levels.
RESULTS: 91.1% and 93.5% of LAL and LAL+ eyes had a manifest refraction spherical equivalent within 0.50 diopter of target, respectively. 92.0% and 89.0% of LAL and LAL+ patients had a binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better after adjustment, respectively. 86.0% and 93.0% of LAL and LAL+ patients had binocular uncorrected best focus visual acuity of J1 or better at 100% contrast, respectively. Distance corrected intermediate and near visual acuity was better with the LAL+ compared with the LAL, consistent with its further broadened DoF. Best corrected distance vision was only slightly reduced for LAL+ (1 letter), with both lenses achieving high levels.
CONCLUSIONS: Both LAL and LAL+ achieved excellent refractive and binocular visual outcomes at distance, intermediate, and near. The broadened DoF of the LAL+ was clinically evident and led to less anisometropia. The ability of patients to binocularly select and adjust their refraction according to their visual goal is a unique therapeutic approach to cataract refractive patients.
SETTING: Private practice clinics.
DESIGN: Prospective, nonrandomized, nonmask, multicenter.
METHODS: Clinical data collection registry of patients bilaterally implanted with the LAL or LAL+. Outcome measures included subjective manifest refraction; monocular corrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuity; binocular uncorrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity; and binocular uncorrected best focus visual acuity at differing contrast levels.
RESULTS: 91.1% and 93.5% of LAL and LAL+ eyes had a manifest refraction spherical equivalent within 0.50 diopter of target, respectively. 92.0% and 89.0% of LAL and LAL+ patients had a binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better after adjustment, respectively. 86.0% and 93.0% of LAL and LAL+ patients had binocular uncorrected best focus visual acuity of J1 or better at 100% contrast, respectively. Distance corrected intermediate and near visual acuity was better with the LAL+ compared with the LAL, consistent with its further broadened DoF. Best corrected distance vision was only slightly reduced for LAL+ (1 letter), with both lenses achieving high levels.
CONCLUSIONS: Both LAL and LAL+ achieved excellent refractive and binocular visual outcomes at distance, intermediate, and near. The broadened DoF of the LAL+ was clinically evident and led to less anisometropia. The ability of patients to binocularly select and adjust their refraction according to their visual goal is a unique therapeutic approach to cataract refractive patients.