Wavefront Analysis and Contrast Sensitivity of Aspheric and Spherical Intraocular Lenses: A Randomized Prospective Study

Rocha, Karolinne Maia; Soriano, Eduardo; Chalita, Maria Regina; Yamada, A; Bottós, Kátia Mantovani; Bottós, Juliana Mantovani; Morimoto, Lisangela; Nosé, Walton

doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2006.06.031

Cited by 135 publications

(104 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is to be noted that we used a larger pupil size (5 mm) for aberration analysis compared to the 4 mm that they used. The results of our study are similar to those reported by Maia-Rocha and coworkers 12 in their study comparing the AcrysofIQ to the AcrysofNatural and Sensar using 4 and 5 mm pupil sizes; the total HOA and SA were significantly lower in the AcrysofIQ group. Kasper et al 13 also reported significantly lower SA comparing Tecnis and Sensar for physiological mesopic pupil of 3.84 and 3.76 mm, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Comparison of visual outcomes, photopic contrast sensitivity, wavefront analysis, and patient satisfaction following cataract extraction and IOL implantation: aspheric vs spherical acrylic lenses

Sandoval

Castro

Vroman

et al. 2007

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Comparison of visual outcomes, photopic contrast sensitivity, wavefront analysis, and patient satisfaction following cataract extraction and IOL implantation: aspheric vs spherical acrylic lenses

Sandoval

Castro

Vroman

et al. 2007

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The greater variability of the present result may be because the i-Trace adapted ray-tracing technology is very flexible and robust for examining extreme aberrations, whereas Shack-Hartmann-based systems tend to have a limited dynamic range in measuring higher order aberrations. 13 There is accumulating evidence supporting the functional vision benefit of aspheric over spherical IOLs, [6][7][8][9][10][20][21][22] and this study is consistent with such reports. On the contrary, some recent clinical trials reported no significant gains with the aspheric IOL in terms of BCVA, [10][11][12][13][20][21][22] or other subjective questionnaires, such as visual function-14(VF-14) score, 13 or the activities of daily vision scale.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…[20][21][22] Although they are theoretically similar to the Tecnis, different amounts of SA correction were introduced. The Tecnis has a lens SA of À0.27 mm, aiming for zero residual SA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of higher order aberrations in eyes with aspherical or spherical intraocular lenses

Ahn

Kim

et al. 2008

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To compare ocular, internal, corneal aberrations, and contrast sensitivity in patients implanted with aspheric or spherical intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods Total, corneal, and internal aberrations were measured using ray-tracing technology in 23 eyes implanted with aspheric (Tecnis ZA9003) IOLs, and in 25 eyes implanted with spherical (AcrySof SA60AT) IOLs. Spherical aberration (SA), coma, trefoil, and RMS of higher order aberrations (HOAs) were analysed for 4.0 and 6.0 mm optical zones. Best-corrected visual acuities (BCVAs), contrast sensitivity under photopic and mesopic conditions, and modulation transfer function (MTF) were evaluated to compare visual performances. Results The mean internal SA was À0.06/ À0.35 lm in the aspheric IOL group and 0.04/ 0.17 lm in the spherical IOL group (at 4 mm/ 6 mm pupil). Total SA was near to zero in the aspheric IOL group, and was 0.11±0.034/ 0.48±0.13 lm in the spherical IOL group. The internal Z 3 À1 and total Z 3 À1 were more negative in the spherical IOL group. The internal Z 3 À3 was more negative in the aspheric IOL group. The two groups were similar in terms of other Zernike values and RMS of HOA. There were no differences in BCVA between groups. The aspheric IOL group showed better contrast sensitivity at 3-6 cpd in photopic and 1.5-6 cpd in mesopic conditions. The MTF curve was better for the aspheric IOL group at 5-10 cpd. Conclusions The aspheric IOL with a negative SA reduced total SA by compensating for positive corneal SA. These effects resulted in improved contrast sensitivity.

show abstract

“…[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] What is less clear is whether the patients are aware of any difference in quality of vision between the aspheric and spherical lenses. A few studies have attempted to address this question.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Objective and subjective outcomes in comparing three different aspheric intraocular lens implants with their spherical counterparts

Cuthbertson

Dhingra

Benjamin

2008

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To look for objective and subjective differences between three types of aspheric intraocular lens implants and their spherical counterparts. Methods Thirty patients were randomised to receive one of six lens implants including three aspheric lenses and their spherical counterparts. Pre and postoperative testing was carried out including visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and wavefront analysis. All patients were asked to fill in a visual function questionnaire (modification of cataract TyPE) to assess subjective differences in visual quality. Results There was no significant difference between groups for best-corrected visual acuity. Contrast sensitivity testing showed the Tecnis lens to perform better than the Cee-on Edge in all lighting conditions with significant differences at 3 and/or 6 cycles/degree in three out of four lighting conditions. No significant differences in contrast sensitivity were seen between the other lens pairs. All aspheric lenses showed less spherical aberration than their spherical pairs with statistical significance reached in two out of three pairs (the Ceeon Edge vs Tecnis, and Acrysof Natural vs IQ). The questionnaire revealed no evidence of improved subjective vision with the aspheric lenses compared to the spherical lenses. Conclusions This pilot study concurs with previously published trials in showing decreased spherical aberration and improved contrast sensitivity with aspheric lenses compared to spherical lenses. There was no evidence that the patients implanted with aspheric lenses rate their quality of vision higher than those implanted with spherical lenses. Study numbers were small and larger numbers may be required to demonstrate statistical differences in subjective data.

show abstract

Wavefront Analysis and Contrast Sensitivity of Aspheric and Spherical Intraocular Lenses: A Randomized Prospective Study

Cited by 135 publications

References 35 publications

Comparison of visual outcomes, photopic contrast sensitivity, wavefront analysis, and patient satisfaction following cataract extraction and IOL implantation: aspheric vs spherical acrylic lenses

Comparison of visual outcomes, photopic contrast sensitivity, wavefront analysis, and patient satisfaction following cataract extraction and IOL implantation: aspheric vs spherical acrylic lenses

Comparison of higher order aberrations in eyes with aspherical or spherical intraocular lenses

Objective and subjective outcomes in comparing three different aspheric intraocular lens implants with their spherical counterparts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About