Visual function with bilateral implantation of monofocal and multifocal intraocular lenses: a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial

PURPOSE: To evaluate visual function of three types of multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and one monofocal IOL (as the control group) after cataract surgery. METHODS: One hundred fourteen patients participated in a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study and received monofocal Tecnis Z9000 (AMO) (n = 24, 48 eyes); symmetric diffractive multifocal Tecnis ZM900 (AMO) (n = 26, 52 eyes); zonal refractive multifocal ReZoom (AMO) (n = 32, 64 eyes); and asymmetric diffractive multifocal TwinSet (Acri.Tec) (n = 32, 64 eyes) IOLs. RESULTS: Mean binocular distance best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) (logMAR) was 0.05 for controls, 0.08 for ZM900, 0.07 for ReZoom, and 0.11 for TwinSet, with mean binocular distance BSCVA at near of 0.49, 0.06, 0.22, and 0.11, respectively. Mean contrast sensitivity was better for the monofocal IOL group than for the multifocal IOLs. Patients assigned to TwinSet had less favorable contrast sensitivity scores. Patients with monofocal IOLs had more frequently recommended near addition (74%) than those with multifocal IOLs. Patients with refractive ReZoom had also recommended near addition more frequently than the two diffractive groups. The percentage of dysphotopsia phenomena was 81% in patients with diffractive multifocal ZM900 compared with 48% in patients with monofocal IOLs, 53% with refractive ReZoom, and 47% with diffractive TwinSet. CONCLUSIONS: The monofocal IOL showed better visual function and lesser photic phenomena than multifocal IOLs but patients were spectacle dependent. ReZoom provided better distance BSCVA than the TwinSet diffractive model. Patients with Tecnis and TwinSet diffractive multifocal IOLs were more spectacle independent than patients with ReZoom. Patients with TwinSet had the worst visual function. Patients implanted with the Tecnis diffractive ZM900 were those reporting more photic phenomena.     

Reading ability with 3 multifocal intraocular lens models

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate reading performance with of 3 types of multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) under different lighting conditions based on reading acuity and reading speed tests. SETTING: Augenklinik, Bad Hersfeld, Germany. METHODS: This randomized study comprised 60 cataract patients (120 eyes) randomly assigned to receive an SA40N IOL (AMO) (Group 1, 20 patients), Tecnis ZM001 IOL (AMO) (Group 2, 20 patients), or AcrySof ReSTOR SA60D3 IOL (Alcon) (Group 3, 20 patients). Pupil size and reading ability at near (visual acuity, reading speed) without correction, with best distance correction, and with best near correction were assessed 6 weeks postoperatively under low-light conditions (6 cd/m(2)) and bright-light conditions (100 cd/m(2)) using the Radner Reading Charts. RESULTS: Six weeks postoperatively, there was no significant difference between groups in pupil size measured under low-light (6 cd/m(2)) or bright-light (100 cd/m(2)) conditions. When assessed under low-light conditions, near visual acuity and reading speed with or without correction were generally better in Group 2 than in Groups 1 and 3; there were no significant difference between Groups 1 and 3. Under bright-light conditions, Groups 2 and 3 performed significantly better than Group 1 and Group 2 performed better than Group 3. CONCLUSIONS: Under bright-light conditions, second-generation multifocal IOLs provided better reading performance than the Array SA40N IOL. However, when tested under low-light conditions, patients with the Tecnis ZM001 IOL had the best reading acuity and reading speed.     

Tecnis Z9000人工晶状体植入术后的视功能改变

目的:评价非球面人工晶状体(intraocular lens,IOL)TecnisZ9000对提高年龄相关性白内障患者术后视功能的作用。方法:选取年龄相关性白内障患者34例36眼,其中18眼为Tecnis Z9000组,18眼为传统球面人工晶状体组。检查术后3mo最佳矫正远视力,不同亮度环境及有、无散瞳条件下的对比敏感度(contrast sensitivity,CS)。结果:手术后3mo最佳矫正远视力Tecnis Z9000组为0.89±0.17,球面人工晶状体组为0.76±0.16,两组差异有显著性(P<0.05)。正常瞳孔下,两组晶状体在不同空间频率(1.5,3,6,12,18c/d)、不同照明条件下CS无显著差别。散瞳后Tecnis组亮环境(亮度为85cd/m2)下的12,18c/dCS及暗环境(亮度为3cd/m2)下1.5,3c/dCS均分别与同条件下的球面人工晶状体组比较差异有显著性。结论:白内障术后早期,Tecnis Z9000可提高最佳矫正远视力和对比敏感度,改善术眼视功能。     

Tecnis ZM900和Rezoom多焦点人工晶状体植入术后视功能比较

目的 比较Tecnis ZM900和Rezoom多焦点人工晶状体（MIOL）植入术后的视功能情况.方法 前瞻性对照研究.拟行白内障超声乳化吸除术患者36例（40眼）,年龄55～83岁.按照患者植入人工晶状体的不同分为两组：Tecnis组22例（25眼）,植入TecnisZM900 MIOL Rezoom组14例（15眼）,植入Rezoom MIOL.术后3个月,随访观察两组的屈光状态及最佳矫正远视力,远、中、近距离裸眼视力,并检查明、暗光条件下对比敏感度和球差.采用两样本t检验对结果进行分析.结果 术后3个月,两组最佳矫正远视力、裸眼远视力、100 cm中距离视力比较,Rezoom组优于Tecnis组（t=0.85、2.50、2.15,P＜0.05）.两组63 cm中距离视力和40 cm近视力比较,差异无统计学意义（t=1.55、0.45,P＞0.05）.33 cm近视力比较,Tecnis组优于Rezoom组（t=5.52,P＜0.05）.暗光条件下低频（3、6 c/d）对比敏感度比较,Tecnis组优于Rezoom组（t=2.15、3.01,P＜0.05） 而两组暗光下高频和明光下各空间频率对比敏感度比较,差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）.在3、4、5 mm瞳孔直径下,Tecnis组全眼球差均低于Rezoom组,差异有统计学意义（t=2.16、2.28、4.00,P＜0.05）.结论 Rezoom MIOL能提供较好的远、中距离视力,近视力相对较差 Tecnis ZM900 MIOL能提供较好的远、近视力,中距离视力相对较差.相对于Rezoom MIOL,Tecnis ZM900 MIOL的非球面设计降低了全眼球差,改善了暗光大瞳孔下的低频区对比敏感度.     

Depth of focus in eyes with diffractive bifocal and refractive multifocal intraocular lenses

PURPOSE: To evaluate monocular and binocular depth of focus in eyes with different multifocal intraocular lens (IOLs) systems. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. METHODS: In this comparative interventional study, binocular implantation of multifocal IOLs was performed in 3 groups. In the first group, 26 eyes of 13 patients received asymmetric Acri.Twin (Acri.Tec) IOLs, a near-weighted 733D in 1 eye and a distance-weighted 737D in the fellow eye. In the second group, 26 eyes of 13 patients received a diffractive 811E IOL (Pharmacia). In the third group, 26 eyes of 13 patients received a refractive Array IOL (AMO). The visual acuity was tested monocularly and binocularly starting at 6 m in 0.50 diopter (D) defocusing steps. RESULTS: Distance visual acuity was best in eyes with the distance-dominated 737D IOL; eyes with the other IOLs had comparable results. Binocular distance visual acuity was comparable between the Acri.Twin group and the 811E group. The Acri.Twin group had better distance visual acuity than the Array group (P< or =.048). Near visual acuity was best in eyes with the near-weighted 733D, followed by the 737D and the 811E. Patients with Array IOLs had worse visual acuities at reading distance (between 33 cm and 40 cm) (P< or =.001). Patients with diffractive bifocal IOLs had better results than patients with refractive multifocal IOLs at reading distance (P< or =.018). CONCLUSION: The diffractive IOLs performed better than refractive IOLs. Asymmetric-weighted IOLs provided better binocular depth of field.     

新型衍射型非球面多焦点人工晶状体的临床应用

目的比较白内障超声乳化联合植入新型衍射型非球面多焦点人工晶状体Tecnis AMO00及非球面单焦点人工晶状体Tecnis的临床效果。方法选择老年性白内障患者,根据植入的晶状体不同分为2组:多焦点组46例62眼,植入Tecnis AMO00新型衍射型非球面多焦点人工晶状体,单焦点组42例68眼,植入Tecnis非球面单焦点人工晶状体。术后1个月和3个月随访,观察术后裸眼远视力、裸眼近视力、最佳矫正远视力、最佳矫正近视力及中间距离视力,术后3个月进行角膜内皮计数及角膜地形图检查,问卷调查了解视觉症状和视觉满意度。结果术后1个月及3个月两组间患者裸眼远视力、最佳矫正远视力和最佳矫正近视力均无显著差异。术后1个月及3个月多焦点组裸眼近视力分别为0.65±0.27和0.68±0.28,中间距离视力分别为0.64±0.22和0.67±0.25,相比单焦点组术后1个月及3个月的裸眼近视力(分别为0.28±0.26和0.30±0.25)和中间距离视力(分别为0.27±0.25和0.29±0.27),具有明显优越性,差异均有统计学意义(均为P<0.05)。两组患者术前、术后的散光状态差异均有统计学意义(均为P<0.01),术前、术后的角膜内皮细胞计数差异亦均有统计学意义(均为P<0.01),两组之间术后角膜内皮细胞丢失率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。多焦点组脱镜率(96.77%)明显高于单焦点组(25.00%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。多焦点组4例患者诉轻度光晕、眩光,但在可以忍受范围内。结论新型衍射型非球面多焦点人工晶状体Tecnis AMO00能提供良好的全程视力,有效降低患者对老视镜的依赖,提高白内障患者术后的视觉质量。     

Comparison of visual performance of silicone and acrylic multifocal IOLs utilizing the same diffractive design

Purpose: To compare the visual outcomes in patients implanted with a diffractive silicone multifocal in one eye and a diffractive acrylic multifocal IOL in their fellow eye. Setting: Augenklinik, Bad Hersfeld, Germany. Methods: Forty‐two eyes of 21 cataract surgery patients were randomized to undergo implantation with either a silicone diffractive multifocal IOL (Tecnis ZM900, Abbott Medical Optics, Santa Ana, CA, USA) or an acrylic diffractive multifocal IOL (Tecnis ZMA00, AMO). The two IOLs share the same design platform. Outcome measurements included uncorrected and best‐corrected distance and near visual acuity, spherical equivalent, reading speed and reading acuity, as well as photic phenomena. Patients were followed for 6 months following surgery. Results: The mean spherical equivalent was 0.161 D (acrylic) and 0.065 D (silicone). The mean uncorrected visual acuity was 0.17 logMAR for the acrylic eyes and 0.17 logMAR for the silicone eyes, a difference of 0.01 (p = 0.861). The mean best‐corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 0.08 for the acrylic eyes and 0.10 for the silicone lens, a difference of 0.03 (p = 0.321). Conclusions: Given that the designs of the lenses are identical and that this was a contralateral eye study, it is reasonable to expect that the results between the two eyes and two types of lenses were similar. Both versions of this lens provide excellent visual function.     

Long-term experience with mixing and matching refractive array and diffractive CeeOn multifocal intraocular lenses

PURPOSE: To compare visual performance of the refractive Array SA40N and the diffractive CeeOn 811E multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and to evaluate the potential benefits of combining both multifocal IOLs in the same patient. METHODS: Two groups of cataract patients were unilaterally implanted with either the CeeOn diffractive (n = 10) or the Array refractive multifocal IOL (n = 10). Another group was bilaterally implanted with one of each multifocal IOLs (mix & match group, n = 10). Visual acuity, spectacle independence, depth of focus, contrast sensitivity, presence of photic phenomena, and patient satisfaction were assessed postoperatively. RESULTS: All eyes achieved good distance visual acuity but better uncorrected near vision was achieved with the CeeOn diffractive design. Contrast sensitivity with either multifocal IOL was at the lower limit of the normal range but when multifocal IOLs were combined in the same patient, contrast sensitivity was not significantly different from phakic controls. Defocus curves revealed a superiority of CeeOn diffractive design for near and Array refractive design for intermediate but mix & match patients performed better overall than the other patients, particularly for intermediate distances, which was reflected by total independence from spectacles in 90% of patients compared to 60% in the other groups. Visual outcomes remained unchanged over time (1 month vs 6 month vs > 3 years). CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral implantation with a diffractive multifocal IOL in one eye and a refractive multifocal IOL in the fellow eye is safe and could provide patients with better intermediate vision, increased depth of focus and contrast sensitivity, and also less dependence on spectacles.     

Prospective visual evaluation of apodized diffractive intraocular lenses

PURPOSE: To evaluate distance, intermediate, and near visual performance in patients who had multifocal apodized diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. SETTING: Fernández-Vega Ophthalmological Institute, Oviedo, Spain. METHODS: The best corrected distance visual acuity, best distance-corrected near visual acuity, intermediate visual acuity, distance contrast sensitivity under photopic and mesopic conditions, and patient satisfaction were measured in 325 patients and 335 patients who had bilateral implantation of the model SA60D3 IOL (AcrySof ReSTOR, Alcon) and model SN60D3 IOL (AcrySof Natural ReSTOR), respectively. RESULTS: At the 6-month postoperative visit, binocular best corrected distance acuity with the ReSTOR IOL and the Natural ReSTOR IOL was 0.034 logMAR+/-0.004 (SD) and 0.019+/-0.020 logMAR, respectively (approximately 20/20). Binocular best distance-corrected near acuity was 0.011+/-0.012 logMAR and 0.035+/-0.013 logMAR, respectively (approximately 20/20). Intermediate visual acuity with both IOL models worsened significantly as a function of the distance of the test (P<.01). Photopic contrast sensitivity was within the standard normal range with both IOLs. Under mesopic conditions, contrast sensitivity with both IOLs was comparable to that with monofocal IOLs and lower, particularly at higher spatial frequencies, than under photopic conditions. No statistically significant differences in visual acuity or photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity were found between the 2 IOL models (P>.1). A patient satisfaction questionnaire showed that both IOLs performed well and were comparable in satisfaction regarding distance, intermediate, and near activities under different lighting conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The AcrySof ReSTOR IOL and AcrySof Natural ReSTOR IOL provided good visual performance at distance and near under photopic and mesopic conditions. Intermediate vision with both models was reduced compared with distance and near vision.     

Reading ability and stereoacuity with combined implantation of refractive and diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses

Purpose: To evaluate reading ability and stereoscopic vision with combined implantation of refractive and diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: Thirty‐one cataract patients (62 eyes) were assigned to receive either a ReZoom NXG1 IOL in the dominant eye and a Tecnis ZM900 IOL in the fellow eye (MIOL group), or Sensar AR40e IOLs bilaterally (SIOL group). The uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) at 500 cm, best spectacle‐corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) at 500 cm, reading acuity, reading speed, near stereoacuity and questionnaire were assessed 3 months postoperatively. Results: Three months postoperatively, monocular and binocular UCVA and BSCVA at 500 cm showed no significant differences in both groups. The uncorrected reading acuity and reading speed in the MIOL group were significantly better than those in the SIOL group and were similar to that with correction in the SIOL group. The uncorrected mean near stereoacuity in the MIOL group was significantly better than that in the SIOL group (69 ± 50 seconds of arc in the MIOL group versus 180 ± 160 seconds of arc in the SIOL group). Patients in the MIOL group had a high level of satisfaction and more than 80% of them had an increased independence from spectacles for brief reading. Conclusion: The combined implantation of refractive and diffractive multifocal IOLs was effective in improving reading ability and near stereoacuity with a good visual quality.     

衍射型非球面多焦点人工晶状体眼视功能的初步观察

目的:初步观察植入TecnisZM900衍射型非球面多焦点人工晶状体眼视功能,以评价TecnisZM900衍射型非球面多焦人工晶状体植入的有效性及安全性。方法:共21例(30眼)行白内障超声乳化术患者植入Tec-nisZM900衍射型非球面多焦点人工晶状体,观察患者术后远、近视力,角膜散光度数,对比敏感度,手术并发症,问卷形式调查脱镜率、视觉不良症状和满意度,随访时间为术后3～12mo。结果:植入TecnisZM900MIOL患者术后3mo裸眼远、近视力分别为1.00±0.20,0.86±0.27;术前与术后3mo角膜散光度数比较,差异无显著意义(P>0.05);对比敏感度在低、中空间频率段均位于正常范围内,高空间频率段则有部分病例稍下降;脱镜率为86%(18/21)。结论:TecnisZM900衍射型非球面多焦点人工晶状体可为患者提供良好的远、近视力,86%的患者可摘掉眼镜。     

Quality of vision after AMO Array multifocal intraocular lens implantation

PURPOSE: To evaluate safety and efficacy of Array SA40N multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) (AMO) implantation in cataract surgery. SETTING: Helsinki University Eye Hospital, Helsinki, Finland. METHODS: In this prospective randomized comparative trial, 80 patients scheduled for cataract surgery were selected based on preoperative counseling and randomized to have multifocal or monofocal IOL implantation. Fifty-three eyes of 35 patients received a multifocal IOL and 67 eyes of 40 patients, a monofocal IOL. The incidence of complications and visual outcome in the multifocal and monofocal IOL groups were compared. Quality of vision was measured by comparing the severity of visual symptoms (glare, halos, and cataract symptoms score), changes in functional impairment measured by a 7-item visual function test (VF-7), changes in global measures of vision (trouble and satisfaction with vision), and range of accommodation and contrast sensitivity. RESULTS: Intraoperative and postoperative complications and adverse events were few and required no further surgical intervention. Both distance and near visual acuities were significantly better in the multifocal group than in the monofocal group; the difference was most prominent in distance corrected near acuity (P<.001). Thirty-five eyes (67.3%) in the multifocal group and 10 eyes (14.9%) in the monofocal group achieved a distance corrected near acuity of J6 (20/40) or better; 30 eyes (56.6%) and 19 eyes (28.4%), respectively, achieved a best corrected distance acuity of 20/20 or better. Glare symptoms decreased postoperatively in both groups but were slightly more common in the multifocal group. In contrast, halos were significantly more common at 1 month in the multifocal group (P<.001). Contrast sensitivity values were slightly lower with multifocal IOLs at almost all spatial frequencies, but the difference was not significant. The change in the quality of life postoperatively, measured with the VF-7, was significant and identical in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Pseudophakic eyes with multifocal IOLs had better distance and near acuity and range of accommodation than eyes with a monofocal IOL. Slightly lower contrast sensitivity and increased perception of halos by subjects with the multifocal IOL appear to be an acceptable compromise to enhanced near and distance vision.     

双眼植入不同类型多焦点人工晶状体术后视功能的临床观察

目的 探讨超声乳化白内障吸除联合双眼分别植入折射型与衍射型多焦点人工晶状体(MIOL)术后的波前像差、对比敏感度(CS)及立体视功能.方法 前瞻性研究.将年龄相关性白内障患者分为MIOL组与单焦点人工晶状体(SIOL)组,每组各15例(30只眼),行超声乳化白内障吸除联合人工晶状体(IOL)植入术.MIOL组为主导眼植入ReZoom NXG1 IOL(即NXG1组),对侧眼植入Tecnis ZM900 IOL(即ZM900组);SIOL组为同期双眼植入Sensar AR40e IOL(即AR40e组).观察患者术后波前像差、CS、眩光敏感度(GS)及近立体视锐度.两组中波前像差和近立体视锐度比较分别采用单因素方差分析,CS和GS比较采用析因设计方差分析,两两比较采用ISD检验.结果 术后1个月观察发现,ReZoom NXG1 IOL眼、Tecnis ZM900 IOL眼的球差明显低于Sensar AR40e IOL眼的球差(F=11.734;P=0.001,0.000),三者之间的总体像差和高阶像差间的差异无统计学意义(F=0.724,0.173;P=0.493.0.842).ReZoom NXG1 IOL眼、Tecnis ZM900 IOL眼和Sensar R40e IOL眼在各视角的CS及CS比较,差异均无统计学意义(CS:F=0.959,0.978,2.779,0.590,0.485,0175; P=0.398,0.388,0.079,0.564,0.625,0.847;GS:F=0.117,0.479,0.806,1.235,0.531,1.144;P=0.902,0.627,0.458,0.309,0.597,0.383).MIOL组患者术后近立体视锐度可达45.6弧秒,与SIOL组比较差异有统计学意义(F=2.923;P=0.010,0.014).结论 双眼联合植入折射型与衍射型IOL,在一定程度上可以使患者获得良好的视功能.     

Visual function and complications after cataract surgery with bilateral multifocal intraocular lens implantation

PURPOSE: To evaluate the visual function and complications after cataract surgery with bilateral Array SA 40N multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective study comprised 40 eyes of selected 20 patients undergoing cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of Array SA 40N (AMO). multifocal IOL. Three months after bilateral surgery distance and near visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, complications and adverse effects were evaluated. Patients' satisfaction was assessed using a subjective TyPE Questionnaire. RESULTS: Thirty-five eyes (35/40 - 87.5%) achieved the uncorrected distance visual acuity 20/40 and the uncorrected near visual acuity of J5 or better. Eighty-two and a half percent of the operated eyes achieved UCDVA 20/20 and J4 or better. Contrast sensitivity for distance and near measured binocularly were within normal limits, although for higher spatial frequency, contrast sensitivity values for near were slightly above the lower limit of normal range. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were few and only in one eye, further surgical intervention was necessary (IOL recentration). Three patients (3/20 - 15%) reported moderate glare and halo. Overall visual satisfaction measured with TyPE Questionnaire was very high (8.7/10). CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral multifocal IOL implantation was effective and safe in selected cataract patients, providing very good uncorrected distance and near visual acuity. Slightly reduced contrast sensitivity and increased perception of glare/halo were an acceptable compromise for near, as well as distance vision improvement.     

Image quality with multifocal intraocular lenses and the effect of pupil size: comparison of refractive and hybrid refractive-diffractive designs

PURPOSE: To analyze the image quality with a refractive and 2 hybrid refractive-diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) in vitro to determine the IOL modulation transfer function (MTF) following the EN-ISO international standard for distance and near vision and to study the IOLs' behavior with different pupil sizes. SETTING: Fundación Oftalmológica del Mediterráneo, Valencia, Spain. METHODS: This study evaluated 4 IOLs: the hybrid refractive-diffractive AcrySof ReSTOR SN60D3 (Alcon) and Tecnis ZM900 (AMO), the refractive ReZoom NXG (AMO), and the monofocal AcrySof SN60WF (Alcon). The MTF was calculated from the cross-line spread function recorded with the OPAL Vector System (Image Science Ltd.) using fast Fourier transform techniques. The artificial eye model simulated in vivo conditions of the anterior chamber and included an artificial cornea and physiological solution, in which the IOLs were positioned. The pupil sizes varied between 2.0 mm and 5.0 mm in steps of 0.5 mm. RESULTS: For distance vision and small pupils (2.0 to 3.5 mm), the refractive IOL provided better image quality than the 2 hybrid IOLs. When the pupil was larger, the distance vision was similar with all IOLs. The 2 hybrid IOLs gave better image quality than the refractive IOL for near vision with any pupil size. With the refractive IOL and pupils smaller than 3.5 mm, near focusing did not occur, resulting in poor image quality. Of the hybrid IOLs, the AcrySof ReSTOR SN60D3 provided better distance image quality and the Tecnis ZM900 provided better near image quality. CONCLUSIONS: The refractive IOL gave better image quality than the hybrid IOLs at distance and with small pupils. With pupils larger than 3.5 mm, the quality was similar. Hybrid IOLs gave significantly better image quality for near vision with all pupil sizes. AcrySof ReSTOR SN60D3 IOLs give better distance vision than Tecnis ZM900 IOLs; the latter gave better near vision. The reference monofocal IOL provided better distance images than any multifocal IOL with all pupil sizes.     

Spherical aberration and contrast sensitivity after cataract surgery with the Tecnis Z9000 intraocular lens

PURPOSE: To determine whether implantation of an intraocular lens (IOL) with a modified prolate anterior surface (Tecnis Z9000, AMO) results in reduced spherical aberration and improved contrast sensitivity after cataract surgery. SETTING: Hospital NISA Virgen del Consuelo, Valencia, Spain. METHODS: In an intraindividual randomized prospective study of 30 patients with bilateral cataract, the Tecnis Z9000 IOL was compared with 2 IOLs with spherical surfaces, the AR40e (AMO) and the Stabibag (Ioltech). Ocular aberrations for a 4.0 mm pupil and 6.0 mm pupil were measured with a Hartmann-Shack aberrometer. Quality of vision was measured by visual acuity and contrast sensitivity under mesopic and photopic conditions. RESULTS: Eyes with the Tecnis Z9000 IOL had significantly less spherical aberration and a greater Strehl ratio after surgery. Significant reduction in coma aberration was also found in some cases. Refraction, visual acuity, and contrast sensitivity were not significantly different between the 3 IOL groups. CONCLUSION: A significant reduction in spherical aberration after Tecnis Z9000 IOL implantation was achieved, but visual acuity and contrast sensitivity were not affected by the aspheric silicone IOL compared to spherical acrylic IOLs.     

Primary piggyback implantation using the Tecnis ZM900 multifocal intraocular lens: case series

PURPOSE: To assess the postoperative outcomes of primary piggyback implantation using the Tecnis ZM900 multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) (Advanced Medical Optics). SETTING: Hospital Oftalmológico de Brasília, Brasília, Brazil. METHODS: Patients who had phacoemulsification with primary piggyback IOL implantation were analyzed prospectively. In all cases, a Tecnis ZM900 multifocal IOL was implanted in the capsular bag and a second silicone IOL was implanted in the ciliary sulcus. Information collected included near and distance uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and the spherical equivalent (SE) before and after the surgery. RESULTS: Twenty eyes of 12 patients were included in the study. They were followed for 6 months. The mean preoperative distance UCVA was 20/400. At the last follow-up (6 months), the mean distance UCVA was 20/29, significantly better than before referral (P<.001). The mean preoperative SE was +6.35 diopters (D) +/- 2.25 (SD). Six months after surgery, the mean SE was -0.25 +/- 0.40 D (range -1.00 to +0.50 D), significantly better than before referral (P<.001). No patient lost lines of BCVA after surgery. At the last follow-up, 90% of the eyes achieved a near UCVA of J1 and 83.3% of patients were spectacle independent for near and distance vision. A second refractive procedure was performed in 2 eyes. CONCLUSIONS: Primary piggyback implantation using the Tecnis ZM900 multifocal IOL was a simple, safe, and accurate option for patients with high hyperopia who wanted to reduce their dependency on spectacles.     

Differences in contrast sensitivity between monofocal,multifocal and accommodating intraocular lenses: long‐term results

Background: To evaluate long‐term contrast sensitivity (CS) and visual acuity following implantation of monofocal, accommodating, refractive and diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) in patients with unilateral cataract Methods: In this prospective non‐randomized clinical trial, 87 patients with unilateral cataract were enrolled in four groups for phacoemulsification and IOL implantation in Ophthalmology Department of Goztepe Training and Research Hospital. Twenty‐four patients had monofocal (Alcon Acrysof; group 1), 21 patients accommodating (Human Optics 1CU; group 2), 22 patients diffractive multifocal (Tecnis ZM900; group 3) and 20 patients refractive multifocal (AMO Rezoom; group 4) IOL implantations. Ages of patients were between 40 and 70. Parameters analysed at the 18th postoperative month were subjective refractions, monocular and binocular distance and near photopic CSs, visual acuities. Results: Near visual acuities were statistically better in group 3 than the other groups (P < 0.05). At low spatial frequencies, mean monocular distance CSs of group 1 and mean monocular near CSs of groups 1 and 2 were statistically higher than those of group 4 (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between binocular CSs of group 4 and the other groups at low spatial frequencies. At high spatial frequencies, monocular and binocular CSs of groups 1 and 2 were statistically higher than those of groups 3 and 4 (P < 0.05). Near CSs was better in group 3 than group 4. Conclusions: In patients with unilateral cataract, monofocal, accommodating and partially diffractive multifocal IOL provided higher CS scores when compared with refractive multifocal IOL and in multifocal IOL groups binocular CSs were better than monocular CSs when compared with other groups.     

折射型多焦点人工晶状体与衍射型非球面多焦点人工晶状体术后视觉质量的临床分析

目的通过分别植入折射型多焦点人工晶状体（Rezoom MIOL）和衍射型非球面多焦点人工晶状体（Tecnis ZM900 MIOL）,观察植入术后的视力、对比敏感度、焦点深度及问卷调查,比较植入Rezoom MIOL和植入Tecnis ZM900 MIOL术后视觉质量。方法将52例（58只眼）拟行白内障超声乳化吸除术按照患者植入人工晶状体的不同分为两组：Rezoom组25例（28只眼）植入Rezoom MIOL,Tecnis组27例（30只眼）植入Tecnis ZM900 MI-OL,术后3个月,随访观察两组裸眼远视力、最佳矫正远视力、裸眼近视力、中间视力;并检查暗光条件下对比敏感度、焦点深度测量及问卷调查;对结果进行分析。结果术后3个月,两组最佳矫正远视力、裸眼远视力比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）;近视力比较,Tecnis组优于Rezoom组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;63 cm中距离视力比较,Rezoom组优于Tecnis组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;暗光（3 cd/m2）背景光线;1.5、3、6、12、18 c/d五种空间频率对比敏感度比较,Tecnis组优于Rezoom组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。术后3个月Rezoom组的焦点深度为4.56 D,Tecnis组焦点深度为5.10 D;Tecnis组与ReZoom组比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。结论 Rezoom MIOL能提供较好的远、中距离视力;Tecnis ZM900 MIOL能提供较好的远、近视力。个性化的选择人工晶状体才能更好地提高术后视觉质量。     

Visual performance of aspherical and spherical intraocular lenses: intraindividual comparison of visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and higher-order aberrations

PURPOSE: To intraindividually compare visual performance in terms of photopic high-contrast visual acuity (HCVA), mesopic HCVA, mesopic low-contrast visual acuity (LCVA), and contrast sensitivity (CS) in patients after implantation of either an aspherical or a spherical intraocular lens (IOL). SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. METHODS: Forty eyes of 20 patients were randomized to implantation of an aspherical IOL (Tecnis Z9000, AMO) in 1 eye and a spherical IOL (Sensar AR40e, AMO) in the other eye. Three to 4 months postoperatively, photopic HCVA (270 cd/m(2)) was measured with the observer-independent Frankfurt-Freiburg Contrast and Acuity Test System (FF-CATS) and high-mesopic HCVA and LCVA (8 cd/m(2)) were measured with Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study charts. CS was assessed with the FF-CATS under photopic (167 cd/m(2)), high-mesopic (1.67 cd/m(2)), and low-mesopic (0.167 cd/m(2)) luminance conditions with and without glare. For each individual eye, higher-order wavefront aberrations were reconstructed for a physiological mesopic pupil diameter. Intraindividual differences (Delta(i)) in visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and higher-order aberrations (HOAs) were calculated, and the influence of age and Delta(i) HOA on Delta(i) contrast sensitivity (logCS) under high-mesopic conditions was investigated using multiple regression analysis. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the Tecnis IOL and the Sensar IOL in visual acuity measurements or contrast sensitivity measurements. For physiological mesopic pupil diameter, primary spherical aberration (Z(4)(0)) was significantly lower in the Tecnis group (P<.001). For all parameters studied except Z(4)(0), the Delta(i) values were distributed around zero. Multiple regression analysis showed only a partial influence of Delta(i) Z(4)(0) on Delta(i) logCS (adjusted R(2) = 0.49) but did not show any influence of age, coma-like aberration, or residual HOA. CONCLUSIONS: Although Z(4)(0) was significantly lower in the eyes with the aspherical IOL, no statistically significant differences were found between aspherical and spherical IOLs in LCVA, HCVA, and contrast sensitivity. Statistical analysis of intraindividual contrast sensitivity differences showed that in most patients, this Z(4)(0) difference was too low to have an effect on contrast sensitivity.