Doroodgar Farideh, Niazi Feizollah, Sanginabadi Azad, Karimian Farid, Niazi Sana, Alinia Cyrus, Javadi Mohammad Ali
Negah Aref Ophthalmic Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Science, Tehran 1544914599, Iran.
Tehran University of Medical Science, Tehran 1544914599, Iran.
Int J Ophthalmol. 2021 Mar 18;14(3):356-365. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2021.03.04. eCollection 2021.
To compare the clinical outcomes of a variety of multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs) in patients diagnosed with presbyopia or cataracts.
This clinical trial study included 141 patients (282 eyes) with different MIOLs implantation. The Symfony (60 eyes), the ReSTOR (100 eyes), the AT LISAtri (60 eyes), and the PanOptix (62 eyes) intraocular lenses were evaluated in this prospective interventional study. The near, intermediate, and distant visual acuities, contrast sensitivity, and defocus curve were measured as valid criteria. To statistically analyze the results, we used the Statistical Package for Social Science software, the non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank , the one-way analysis of variance and the Tukey's post-hoc test in our analysis. Moreover, we conducted a detailed literature search on the PubMed database in English about MIOLs, in total 59 studies were included in this review article.
The four approaches did not show any significant difference in the best-corrected distance visual acuity (>0.05). The defocus curves at the contrast of 100% showed that trifocal IOLs had better intermediate performance than the bifocal IOL (<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between AT LISAtri and PanOptix lenses for visual acuity at all distances. The eyes with PanOptix, Symfony, and AT LISAtri IOL showed better contrast sensitivity than those ReSTOR at spatial frequencies of 1, 3, and 6 cpd in photopic and mesopic conditions (<0.001).
All four groups of the multifocal lenses were satisfying in terms of distance and near vision. Also, the group of trifocal lenses led to satisfactory outcomes in intermediate vision, without degradation in quality of vision.
比较多种多焦点人工晶状体(MIOL)在诊断为老花眼或白内障患者中的临床效果。
本临床试验研究纳入了141例(282只眼)接受不同MIOL植入的患者。在这项前瞻性干预研究中,对Symfony(60只眼)、ReSTOR(100只眼)、AT LISAtri(60只眼)和PanOptix(62只眼)人工晶状体进行了评估。测量近、中、远视力、对比敏感度和散焦曲线作为有效标准。为了对结果进行统计分析,我们在分析中使用了社会科学统计软件包、非参数Wilcoxon符号秩检验、单因素方差分析和Tukey事后检验。此外,我们在PubMed数据库中对有关MIOL的英文文献进行了详细检索,本综述文章共纳入59项研究。
四种方法在最佳矫正远视力方面未显示出任何显著差异(>0.05)。100%对比度下的散焦曲线表明,三焦点人工晶状体的中视力表现优于双焦点人工晶状体(<0.05)。AT LISAtri和PanOptix晶状体在所有距离的视力方面无统计学显著差异。在明视和中视条件下,PanOptix、Symfony和AT LISAtri人工晶状体眼在1、3和6 cpd空间频率下的对比敏感度高于ReSTOR人工晶状体眼(<0.001)。
所有四组多焦点晶状体在远视力和近视力方面均令人满意。此外,三焦点晶状体组在中视力方面也取得了令人满意的结果,且视觉质量未下降。