不同拟调节型人工晶状体植入术后对比敏感度比较

目的 比较植入不同类型的拟调节型人工晶状体术后的对比敏感度.方法 选取47例白内障患者,14例植入Tetraflex IOL,15例术后植入Array(AMO)IOL,10例植入ReZoom(AMO)IOL,8例术后植入SA60D3(Alcon)IOL,观察患者术后远近视力及对比敏感度.结果 4组患者术后远视力、近视力及最佳矫正远视力下的近视力相似,无明显差异.Tetraflex组、ReZoom组和SA60D3组在任何状态下所有空间频率下CS均好于Array组,但不存在统计学差异.在昼眩光18cpd和夜眩光12cpd、18cpd状态下Tetraflex组CS好于其他组,并具有统计学差异.结论 机械调节型和光学调节型IOL使患者术后都具有一定的拟调节力,但各自具有优越性和局限性.

Comparison the contrast sensitivity between the different pseudo-accommodative IOLs

Objective Comparison of the contrast sensitivity between the different types of pseudo-accommodative IOLs after cataract surgery.Methods Selected 47 cataract patients,14 implanted Tetraflex IOL,15 implanted Array(AMO)IOL,10 implanted ReZoom(AMO)IOL,8 implanted SA60D3(Alcon)IOL.The vision acuity of far and near,contrast sensitivity post-operatively was observed.Results In 4 groups of patients,the hyperopia strength,the shortsighted strength and under the best correction hyperopia strength shortsighted strength was similar,no obvious differences.The CS at all spatial frequenees under any condition of Tetraflex,ReZoom and SA60D3 groups were better than Array group,no statistically significant.But at 18cpd of day with glare condition and at 12epd,18cpd of night with glare condition,the CS of Tetraflex group were significant different than another three groups.Conclusions The patients of implantation the different pseudo-accommodative IOLs could have certainly accommodation,but each IOL have the individual advantages and limitations.