Influence of +3.00 D and +4.00 D near addition on functional outcomes of a refractive multifocal intraocular lens model

Rabsilber, Tanja M.; Rudalevičius, Paulius; Jašinskas, Vytautas; Holzer, MP; Auffarth, Gerd U.

doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2012.09.026

Cited by 19 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding was reported some years ago by Petermeier et al 20 in a clinical study aimed at comparing apodised diffractive IOLs with different levels of addition. Also Rabsilber et al 21 showed a better intermediate visual acuity for the lower near addition in the comparison of +4.0 D and +3.0 D refractive MIOLs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Clinical evaluation of a new pupil independent diffractive multifocal intraocular lens with a +2.75 D near addition: a European multicentre study

Kretz

Gerl

et al. 2015

Br J Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Clinical evaluation of a new pupil independent diffractive multifocal intraocular lens with a +2.75 D near addition: a European multicentre study

Kretz

Gerl

et al. 2015

Br J Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…; Rabsilber et al. ). The present study, however, suggests that combined implantation of diffractive MIOLs with +3D and +4D addition power provides better binocular near vision than bilateral implantation of the same +3D MIOLs, probably due to binocular summation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Short‐term outcomes of combined implantation of diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses with different addition power

Hayashi

Yoshida

Hirata

et al. 2014

Acta Ophthalmologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT.Purpose: To compare short-term binocular visual function between patients implanted with diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs) of different near addition powers in each eye or the same MIOLs bilaterally. Methods: Seventy patients scheduled for implantation of diffractive MIOLs were divided into two groups: (i) mix and match group, a MIOL with +3.0 dioptre (D) addition power implanted in the dominant eye (Alcon SN60D1) and a MIOL with +4.0D power implanted in the non-dominant eye (SN60D3) or (ii) same MIOL group, same MIOL (SN60D1) implanted bilaterally. At 3 months postoperatively, we examined binocular visual acuity (VA) at various distances, binocular contrast VA and that with a glare (glare VA), and near stereoacuity. Results: Mean binocular uncorrected (UNVA) or corrected near VA (CNVA) at 0.3 m was significantly better in the mix and match group than in the same MIOL group (p ≤ 0.0066). Binocular uncorrected and distance-corrected VA at other distances was similar. Binocular UNVA of 0.8 or better was achieved in 77.1% of patients in the mix and match group and 45.7% in the same MIOL group (p = 0.0144). Binocular contrast and glare VA, and stereoacuity did not significantly differ between groups. Spectacle independence and patient satisfaction with near vision were significantly better in the mix and match group (p ≤ 0.0195). Conclusion: Mix and match implantation of diffractive MIOLs with different addition power provides a better binocular VA curve and spectacle independence than bilateral implantation of the same MIOLs, without compromising contrast sensitivity and stereopsis.

show abstract

“…Intermediate vision is a challenge with multifocal IOLs, and especially in computer reading [16]. IOLs with a +4dpt add have an optimal reading distance of about 30 cm that might be too close, and visual acuity at 50-70 cm may be as low as 0.4 logMAR ( fig.…”

Section: Intermediate Vision With Multifocal Intraocular Lensesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multifocal and Accommodative Intraocular Lenses

Bellucci¹

2013

Cataract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) have at least two diop tric powers, providing at least two different foci on the same axis. They generate at least two superimposed im ages of each observed object. Image confusion is reduc ed by distant power asphericity, near power apodization, and different distancenear light distribution. At the mo ment, diffractive multifocal IOLs are the most successful. Results show good distance and near visual acuity, reduc ed contrast sensitivity and good patient satisfaction. Ha los and glare are the most frequently reported problems, occasionally causing IOL explantation. Pseudoaccommo dative IOLs are monofocal IOLs that change power with accommodation, usually by forward optic displacement. Their ability to provide good distance and near vision has not been universally confirmed in clinical practice.

show abstract

Influence of +3.00 D and +4.00 D near addition on functional outcomes of a refractive multifocal intraocular lens model

Abstract: Compared with the +4.00 D add, the +3.00 D near add gave better intermediate results in the defocus curve without compromising distance or near visual acuity.

Cited by 19 publications

References 21 publications

Clinical evaluation of a new pupil independent diffractive multifocal intraocular lens with a +2.75 D near addition: a European multicentre study

Clinical evaluation of a new pupil independent diffractive multifocal intraocular lens with a +2.75 D near addition: a European multicentre study

Short‐term outcomes of combined implantation of diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses with different addition power

Multifocal and Accommodative Intraocular Lenses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About