Comparison of a diffractive bifocal and a monofocal intraocular lens

Allen, E. D.; Burton, Robert L.; Webber, S; Haaskjold, Erling; Sandvig, Kjell U.; Jyrkkiö, Hannu; Leite, E.; Nyström, Alf; Wollensak, J.

doi:10.1016/s0886-3350(96)80040-x

Cited by 73 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…If intermediate vision was assessed at distances greater than 70 cm, a statistically significant difference in visual acuity favouring the monofocal group (SN60AT; SN60AT) would probably be found. There was no disagreement between our results and the literature on near and intermediate visual acuity favouring multifocal lenses over monofocal lenses (22,(28)(29)(30) . Hutz et al (28) reported similar data on the superiority of Tecnis™ MF lenses for intermediate vision compared with Restor™ and other monofocal lenses.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 64%

“…If intermediate vision was assessed at distances greater than 70 cm, a statistically significant difference in visual acuity favouring the monofocal group (SN60AT; SN60AT) would probably be found. There was no disagreement between our results and the literature on near and intermediate visual acuity favouring multifocal lenses over monofocal lenses (22,(28)(29)(30) . Hutz et al (28) Hida WT, Nakano CT, Yamane I, Motta AFP, Tzeliks PF, Guimaraes AS, Alencar LM, Ventura DSF, Alves MR, Kara José Júnior N Leyland et al (22) did a meta-analysis of studies comparing multifocal and monofocal lenses and reported a better uncorrected far visual acuity in patients with monofocal lenses, while other studies found no difference (29,30) .…”

Section: Sn60at/sn60wf (N=32) Restor (N=16) Tecnis Mf (N=23) Independcontrasting

confidence: 64%

“…2013; 72 (6): 388-95 Hida WT, Nakano CT, Yamane I, Motta AFP, Tzeliks PF, Guimaraes AS, Alencar LM, Ventura DSF, Alves MR, Kara José Júnior N Leyland et al (22) did a meta-analysis of studies comparing multifocal and monofocal lenses and reported a better uncorrected far visual acuity in patients with monofocal lenses, while other studies found no difference (29,30) . This can be explained by the fact that part of the light is split to a focus anterior to the retina in near vision, while with monofocal lenses all energy is concentrated in the far focus.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Elaboração e validação do questionário de satisfação dos pacientes pseudofácicos em português

Hida¹,

Nakano²,

Yamane³

et al. 2013

Rev. bras.oftalmol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Development and validation of quality of life questionnaire in pseudophakic patients in Portuguese. Methods: The modified Cataract TyPESpecification questionnaire was specifically developed to assess quality of life after cataract surgery, functional status evaluated with 10 items and contains 18 questions. All questions were applied by a single examiner, with the goal of graduating visual satisfaction from 0 to 10 (0 means very dissatisfied, 5 neutral, 10 very satisfied).This prospective comparative study included 142 eyes of 71 patients in Sao Paulo University. The ophthalmologic evaluation performed included near, intermediate and distance corrected and uncorrected visual acuity and quality of life questionaire. The minimum follow-up was 6 months. Results: The mean age of patients was 60.7± 6.6 years in theTecnis ® MF, 63.1 ±4.4 years in-groupRestor ® 63.7±4.2 years in-group SN60AT/SN60WF. Uncorrected and distance-corrected near visual acuity were statistically higher in theRestor ® and Tecnis ® groups compared to the SN60AT/SN60WF group (p<0.001). There were no statistical differences between groups comparing uncorrected and best-corrected distance visual acuity (p=0.56). Satisfaction questionnaire showed high glasses independence fortheTecnis ® MF (9.3 /10) and Restor ® (8.7 /10) INTRODUCTIONP hacoemulsification and IOL implantation using increasingly smaller incisions have allowed rapid visual recovery with low rates of complications in the hands of experienced surgeons, as well as good quality of vision in the postoperative period. Assessment of the quality of vision can be done through various tests, such as those assessing contrast sensitivity, which is the ability to distinguish the details of images and depends on ambient brightness (1)(2)(3)(4) .In order to provide additional benefits to the visual quality of pseudophakic patients, intraocular lenses (IOLs) have been refined using an aspherical lens design to correct positive spherical aberrations of the cornea (5)(6)(7)(8) . One such aspherical lens is the SN60WF lens, developed from the SN60AT lens, both produced by Alcon Laboratories (Fort Worth, Texas, USA). The former provides greater reduction in spherical aberrations with better vision in low light conditions and increased contrast sensitivity in the postoperative period compared to the latter (5,6,9) .Monofocal IOLs are traditionally used for intraocular implants in cataract surgery. Do to their lack of optical correction, they do not provide a satisfactory depth of focus at varying distances. Despite the potential benefits of multifocal IOLs, their indications are still limited (10,11) .More advanced multifocal IOLs aim to provide contrast sensitivity similar that accepted for monofocal IOLs and to induce minimal optical aberrations. However, the scientific literature reports a loss of contrast sensitivity and functional vision associated with photic phenomena that affect patient satisfaction (12,13) .The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a quality of life qu...

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 64%

“…If intermediate vision was assessed at distances greater than 70 cm, a statistically significant difference in visual acuity favouring the monofocal group (SN60AT; SN60AT) would probably be found. There was no disagreement between our results and the literature on near and intermediate visual acuity favouring multifocal lenses over monofocal lenses (22,(28)(29)(30) . Hutz et al (28) Hida WT, Nakano CT, Yamane I, Motta AFP, Tzeliks PF, Guimaraes AS, Alencar LM, Ventura DSF, Alves MR, Kara José Júnior N Leyland et al (22) did a meta-analysis of studies comparing multifocal and monofocal lenses and reported a better uncorrected far visual acuity in patients with monofocal lenses, while other studies found no difference (29,30) .…”

Section: Sn60at/sn60wf (N=32) Restor (N=16) Tecnis Mf (N=23) Independcontrasting

confidence: 64%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Elaboração e validação do questionário de satisfação dos pacientes pseudofácicos em português

Hida¹,

Nakano²,

Yamane³

et al. 2013

Rev. bras.oftalmol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Multifocal IOLs based on either diffractive optics or zones of varying refractive power, divide incoming light into two or more focal points and allow up to 50 per cent of patients to attain spectacle independence, 41 however, due to their design, multifocal implants are frequently associated with poorer contrast sensitivity than monofocal IOLs [42][43][44] and an increased incidence of troublesome visual phenomena including glare and halos. 45,46 To avoid such disturbing visual effects and restore natural accommodative function, the ultimate goal in ongoing AIOL and presbyopia research is to refill the capsular bag with a substance able to mimic the behaviour of the youthful lens mass. 5,47,48 To date, elastic polymers 48,49 and fluid filled balloons 50 have been trialled in animal eyes but not yet in humans in vivo.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Accommodating intraocular lenses: a review of design concepts, usage and assessment methods

Sheppard

Bashir

Wolffsohn

et al. 2010

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The correction of presbyopia and restoration of true accommodative function to the ageing eye is the focus of much ongoing research and clinical work. A range of accommodating intraocular lenses (AIOLs) implanted during cataract surgery has been developed and they are designed to change either their position or shape in response to ciliary muscle contraction to generate an increase in dioptric power. Two main design concepts exist. First, axial shift concepts rely on anterior axial movement of one or two optics creating accommodative ability. Second, curvature change designs are designed to provide significant amplitudes of accommodation with little physical displacement. Single-optic devices have been used most widely, although the true accommodative ability provided by forward shift of the optic appears limited and recent findings indicate that alternative factors such as flexing of the optic to alter ocular aberrations may be responsible for the enhanced near vision reported in published studies. Techniques for analysing the performance of AIOLs have not been standardised and clinical studies have reported findings using a wide range of both subjective and objective methods, making it difficult to gauge the success of these implants. There is a need for longitudinal studies using objective methods to assess long-term performance of AIOLs and to determine if true accommodation is restored by the designs available. While dual-optic and curvature change IOLs are designed to provide greater amplitudes of accommodation than is possible with single-optic devices, several of these implants are in the early stages of development and require significant further work before human use is possible. A number of challenges remain and must be addressed before the ultimate goal of restoring youthful levels of accommodation to the presbyopic eye can be achieved.

show abstract

“…13 Diffractive IOLs are less pupil-dependent and have advantages over refractive IOLs in near vision, 14 however, they can induce slight disturbances of night-vision and a reduction in contrast sensitivity. [15][16][17] New optical designs applied to pseudoaccommodating IOLs combine refractive and diffractive optics to reduce the disadvantages of conventional IOLs with either refractive or diffractive designs. 5,18 The present review will focus on the visual and optical performance of hybrid IOLs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual and optical performance with hybrid multifocal intraocular lenses

Madrid-Costa

Cerviño

Ferrer-Blasco

et al. 2010

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the past years, the wish to become independent of spectacles has been growing among cataract and presbyopic patients due to many factors, such as the increase in near visual demands, the aesthetic need for a spectacle-free image and ageing of refractive surgery patients, among others. This review assesses recently published studies that analyse visual and optical performance through different metrics of eyes implanted with multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs), particularly hybrid IOL designs. The published evidence suggests that hybrid multifocal IOLs provide very good outcomes in a number of visual and optical performance parameters. Patients implanted with this type of IOL obtain a satisfactory full range of visual functions, including patients of particular characteristics such as highly ametropic or post-LASIK.

show abstract

Comparison of a diffractive bifocal and a monofocal intraocular lens

Abstract: The diffractive bifocal IOL performed well at distance and near. Patients who no longer require spectacles will benefit significantly from a bifocal IOL, but many with a bifocal IOL in one eye will require spectacles for the fellow eye.

Cited by 73 publications

References 13 publications

Elaboração e validação do questionário de satisfação dos pacientes pseudofácicos em português

Elaboração e validação do questionário de satisfação dos pacientes pseudofácicos em português

Accommodating intraocular lenses: a review of design concepts, usage and assessment methods

Visual and optical performance with hybrid multifocal intraocular lenses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About