Journal of refractive surgery (Thorofare, N.J. : 1995) · 2025
Prospective Comparison of Clinical Outcomes After Bilateral Implantation of Diffractive Trifocal Extended Depth-of-Focus and Diffractive Trifocal Hydrophobic Intraocular Lenses.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное 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.
Nagy Zoltán Z, Dorman Peter, Szalczer Szilard, Kiss Huba
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare clinical outcomes for patients implanted with either FineVision HP or FineVision Triumf intraocular lenses (IOL) (Beaver-Visitec International, Inc) following cataract surgery.
METHODS: Twenty-six patients bilaterally implanted with the HP IOL and 27 patients with the Triumf IOL were followed up for 6 months in a prospective randomized study. Refraction, uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA), and uncorrected and distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) were evaluated. Defocus curves and contrast sensitivity were also measured. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire 25, and adverse events were registered.
RESULTS: Ninety-four percent of the eyes in both groups were within ±1.00 diopter (D) of spherical equivalent. All of the patients had 20/20 or better binocular CDVA in both groups and 96% and 100% had 20/25 or better binocular CDIVA in the Triumf and HP IOL groups, respectively, being reduced to 32% and 91.7% for DCNVA, respectively. Differences between groups were statistically significant from -2.00 to -4.50 D with better visual acuity outcomes for the HP IOL group (P < .01). Better monocular photopic contrast sensitivity was found for the Triumf IOL group at 12 and 18 cycles per degree (P < .01). There was a statistically significant increase of the overall composite score in both groups before and after surgery (P < .001). Spectacle independence was similar between groups for distance and intermediate vision but higher for the HP IOL for near vision (96% versus 75%). There were no adverse events related to the IOLs.
CONCLUSIONS: Both IOLs showed good and comparable distance and intermediate visual acuities but near vision was better for the HP IOL. This model provided higher spectacle independence for near vision. [J Refract Surg. 2025;41(3):e102-e113.].
METHODS: Twenty-six patients bilaterally implanted with the HP IOL and 27 patients with the Triumf IOL were followed up for 6 months in a prospective randomized study. Refraction, uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA), and uncorrected and distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) were evaluated. Defocus curves and contrast sensitivity were also measured. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire 25, and adverse events were registered.
RESULTS: Ninety-four percent of the eyes in both groups were within ±1.00 diopter (D) of spherical equivalent. All of the patients had 20/20 or better binocular CDVA in both groups and 96% and 100% had 20/25 or better binocular CDIVA in the Triumf and HP IOL groups, respectively, being reduced to 32% and 91.7% for DCNVA, respectively. Differences between groups were statistically significant from -2.00 to -4.50 D with better visual acuity outcomes for the HP IOL group (P < .01). Better monocular photopic contrast sensitivity was found for the Triumf IOL group at 12 and 18 cycles per degree (P < .01). There was a statistically significant increase of the overall composite score in both groups before and after surgery (P < .001). Spectacle independence was similar between groups for distance and intermediate vision but higher for the HP IOL for near vision (96% versus 75%). There were no adverse events related to the IOLs.
CONCLUSIONS: Both IOLs showed good and comparable distance and intermediate visual acuities but near vision was better for the HP IOL. This model provided higher spectacle independence for near vision. [J Refract Surg. 2025;41(3):e102-e113.].
Предметные рубрики MeSH
HumansVisual AcuityProspective StudiesLens Implantation, IntraocularMaleFemalePhacoemulsificationContrast SensitivityRefraction, OcularMultifocal Intraocular LensesPseudophakiaAgedMiddle AgedProsthesis DesignVision, BinocularDepth PerceptionFollow-Up StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment OutcomeLenses, Intraocular