Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2018
Comparison of a panfocal and trifocal diffractive intraocular lens after femtosecond laser-assisted lens surgery.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Böhm Myriam, Hemkeppler Eva, Herzog Michael, Schönbrunn Sabrina, de'Lorenzo Nina, Petermann Kerstin, Kohnen Thomas
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the visual outcomes of 2 diffractive intraocular lenses (IOLs), a panfocal model and a trifocal model, after femtosecond laser-assisted lens surgery.
SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany.
DESIGN: Prospective comparative case series.
METHODS: This study comprised patients who had bilateral implantation of a Panoptix (panfocal) or AT LISA (trifocal) IOL. Exclusion criteria were previous ocular surgery, corneal astigmatism greater than 1.50 diopters, ocular pathology, and corneal abnormalities. Postoperative examinations included visual acuity at 4 m, 40 cm, 60 cm (panfocal), and 80 cm (trifocal); monocular distance-corrected defocus testing; and contrast sensitivity. A quality-of-vision questionnaire was also administered.
RESULTS: The study comprised 80 patients. There was no significant difference in visual acuity (>0.1 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]) at any distance between the 2 IOLs (P > .05). The defocus curve of the panfocal IOL (0.01 logMAR) showed significantly better visual acuity at 50 cm compared with the trifocal IOL (0.16 logMAR) (P < .001). There was no significant between-group difference in the defocus curve at other distances (P > .05). The contrast sensitivity under photopic, mesopic, and mesopic conditions with glare was similar between groups (P > .05).
CONCLUSIONS: Both IOLs provided excellent distance, intermediate, and near vision. The lenses appear to be equally good options for patients with intermediate vision needs at their preferred foci, while the panfocal IOL might be better for patients with closer vision requirements at 60 cm compared to the trifocal IOL at 80 cm. Both yielded high spectacle independence with comparable contrast sensitivity and high patient satisfaction, despite some optical phenomena.
SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany.
DESIGN: Prospective comparative case series.
METHODS: This study comprised patients who had bilateral implantation of a Panoptix (panfocal) or AT LISA (trifocal) IOL. Exclusion criteria were previous ocular surgery, corneal astigmatism greater than 1.50 diopters, ocular pathology, and corneal abnormalities. Postoperative examinations included visual acuity at 4 m, 40 cm, 60 cm (panfocal), and 80 cm (trifocal); monocular distance-corrected defocus testing; and contrast sensitivity. A quality-of-vision questionnaire was also administered.
RESULTS: The study comprised 80 patients. There was no significant difference in visual acuity (>0.1 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]) at any distance between the 2 IOLs (P > .05). The defocus curve of the panfocal IOL (0.01 logMAR) showed significantly better visual acuity at 50 cm compared with the trifocal IOL (0.16 logMAR) (P < .001). There was no significant between-group difference in the defocus curve at other distances (P > .05). The contrast sensitivity under photopic, mesopic, and mesopic conditions with glare was similar between groups (P > .05).
CONCLUSIONS: Both IOLs provided excellent distance, intermediate, and near vision. The lenses appear to be equally good options for patients with intermediate vision needs at their preferred foci, while the panfocal IOL might be better for patients with closer vision requirements at 60 cm compared to the trifocal IOL at 80 cm. Both yielded high spectacle independence with comparable contrast sensitivity and high patient satisfaction, despite some optical phenomena.