Journal of refractive surgery (Thorofare, N.J. : 1995) · 2026
Comparison of Visual Performance Among Two Multifocal-Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lens Types and a Trifocal Intraocular Lens.
СтатьяСравнительное 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.
Hayashi Ken, Uno Koichi, Hayashi Shunsuke, Yoshida Motoaki
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the visual performance of a new multifocal-extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) (TECNIS Odyssey, Johnson & Johnson) with that of an earlier multifocal-EDOF IOL (TECNIS Synergy; Johnson & Johnson) and a trifocal IOL (PanOptix; Alcon Laboratories, Inc).
METHODS: Ninety eyes of 90 patients who received one of two types of multifocal-EDOF IOLs or a trifocal IOL were enrolled. Uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity at various distances, photopic and mesopic contrast visual acuity, and degree of photic symptoms were evaluated at 3 months postoperatively and compared among groups.
RESULTS: Mean uncorrected far and intermediate visual acuities from infinity to 1 m were generally better in the Odyssey group than in the other groups (P ⩽ .046), but uncorrected near visual acuity at 0.3 m and intermediate visual acuity at 0.5 m were worse (P ⩽ .028). However, mean distance-corrected far and intermediate visual acuities from infinity to 1 m, did not differ significantly among groups, and near visual acuity and intermediate visual acuity at 0.5 and 0.7 m were significantly worse, in the Odyssey group than in the other groups (P ⩽ .018). Mean mesopic contrast visual acuity at 10% contrast and glare size were significantly better in the Odyssey group than in the other groups (P ⩽ .040).
CONCLUSIONS: The Odyssey provided better uncorrected far and intermediate visual acuities from infinity to 1 m than the other IOLs despite no significant difference in distance-corrected visual acuity. However, it showed worse uncorrected and distance-corrected near visual acuity and intermediate visual acuities at 0.5 m, suggesting that the Odyssey has far-dominant properties and greater tolerance to refractive errors.
METHODS: Ninety eyes of 90 patients who received one of two types of multifocal-EDOF IOLs or a trifocal IOL were enrolled. Uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity at various distances, photopic and mesopic contrast visual acuity, and degree of photic symptoms were evaluated at 3 months postoperatively and compared among groups.
RESULTS: Mean uncorrected far and intermediate visual acuities from infinity to 1 m were generally better in the Odyssey group than in the other groups (P ⩽ .046), but uncorrected near visual acuity at 0.3 m and intermediate visual acuity at 0.5 m were worse (P ⩽ .028). However, mean distance-corrected far and intermediate visual acuities from infinity to 1 m, did not differ significantly among groups, and near visual acuity and intermediate visual acuity at 0.5 and 0.7 m were significantly worse, in the Odyssey group than in the other groups (P ⩽ .018). Mean mesopic contrast visual acuity at 10% contrast and glare size were significantly better in the Odyssey group than in the other groups (P ⩽ .040).
CONCLUSIONS: The Odyssey provided better uncorrected far and intermediate visual acuities from infinity to 1 m than the other IOLs despite no significant difference in distance-corrected visual acuity. However, it showed worse uncorrected and distance-corrected near visual acuity and intermediate visual acuities at 0.5 m, suggesting that the Odyssey has far-dominant properties and greater tolerance to refractive errors.