A comparison of clinical outcomes and optical performance between monofocal and new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses: a case-control study

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

To compare clinical outcomes and optical performance of a new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses (IOLs) with that of conventional monofocal IOLs.

Methods

Sixty eyes of 30 patients who underwent phacoemulsification with bilateral implantation of the ICB00 (15 patients) or ZCB00 (15 patients) IOLs were enrolled. Binocular corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), distance corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA), and distance corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA) were measured at 4 weeks after surgery. Patient satisfaction for overall, near, intermediate, and distance vision were assessed. The binocular defocus curves were measured. The root mean square of modulation transfer function (MTF _RMS) was measured in the optical bench study.

Results

The mean binocular DCIVA was significantly better in the ICB00 group (0.01 logMAR) compared to the ZCB00 group (0.13 logMAR), but CDVA and DCNVA were not. The patient satisfaction for near and intermediate vision was significantly higher in the ICB00 group compared to the ZCB00. However, there was no difference in patient satisfaction for overall and distance vision between two groups. The defocus curves showed that mean visual acuity of the ICB00 group was significantly better than that of the ZCB00 group at between − 1.00 D to − 3.00 D of defocus. The ICB00 IOL had higher MTF _RMS values at between − 0.50 D to − 2.00 D of defocus compared to the ZCB00 IOL.

Conclusions

The ICB00 IOL provides better binocular intermediate vision and higher satisfaction for near and intermediate vision than the ZCB00 IOL while maintaining excellent distance vision.

Related collections

Most cited references 25

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Is Open Access

Causes of vision loss worldwide, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis.

Rupert R A Bourne, Gretchen Stevens, Richard White … (2013)

Data on causes of vision impairment and blindness are important for development of public health policies, but comprehensive analysis of change in prevalence over time is lacking. We did a systematic analysis of published and unpublished data on the causes of blindness (visual acuity in the better eye less than 3/60) and moderate and severe vision impairment ([MSVI] visual acuity in the better eye less than 6/18 but at least 3/60) from 1980 to 2012. We estimated the proportions of overall vision impairment attributable to cataract, glaucoma, macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, trachoma, and uncorrected refractive error in 1990-2010 by age, geographical region, and year. In 2010, 65% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 61-68) of 32·4 million blind people and 76% (73-79) of 191 million people with MSVI worldwide had a preventable or treatable cause, compared with 68% (95% UI 65-70) of 31·8 million and 80% (78-83) of 172 million in 1990. Leading causes worldwide in 1990 and 2010 for blindness were cataract (39% and 33%, respectively), uncorrected refractive error (20% and 21%), and macular degeneration (5% and 7%), and for MSVI were uncorrected refractive error (51% and 53%), cataract (26% and 18%), and macular degeneration (2% and 3%). Causes of blindness varied substantially by region. Worldwide and in all regions more women than men were blind or had MSVI due to cataract and macular degeneration. The differences and temporal changes we found in causes of blindness and MSVI have implications for planning and resource allocation in eye care. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Fight for Sight, Fred Hollows Foundation, and Brien Holden Vision Institute. Copyright © 2013 Bourne et al. Open Access article distributed under the terms of CC BY. Published by .. All rights reserved.

0 comments Cited 353 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Dissatisfaction after implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses.

Niels de Vries, Carroll Webers, Wouter Touwslager … (2011)

To analyze the symptoms, etiology, and treatment of patient dissatisfaction after multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Department of Ophthalmology, Maastricht University Medical Center, The Netherlands. Case series. In this retrospective chart review, the main outcome measures were type of complaints, uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuities, uncorrected and distance-corrected near visual acuities, refractive state, pupil diameter and wavefront aberrometry measurements, and type of treatment. Seventy-six eyes of 49 patients were included. Blurred vision (with or without photic phenomenon) was reported in 72 eyes (94.7%) and photic phenomena (with or without blurred vision) in 29 eyes (38.2%). Both symptoms were present in 25 eyes (32.9%). Residual ametropia and astigmatism, posterior capsule opacification, and a large pupil were the 3 most significant etiologies. Sixty-four eyes (84.2%) were amenable to therapy, with refractive surgery, spectacles, and laser capsulotomy the most frequent treatment modalities. Intraocular lens exchange was performed in 3 cases (4.0%). The cause of dissatisfaction after implantation of a multifocal IOL can be identified and effective treatment measures taken in most cases. Copyright © 2011 ASCRS and ESCRS. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

0 comments Cited 131 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Age-related cataract

P Asbell, I DUALAN, J Mindel … (2005)

0 comments Cited 109 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Jong Suk Song: crisim@korea.ac.kr

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMC Ophthalmol

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): BMC Ophthalmol

Title: BMC Ophthalmology

Publisher: BioMed Central (London )

ISSN (Electronic): 1471-2415

Publication date (Electronic): 16 October 2021

Publication date PMC-release: 16 October 2021

Publication date Collection: 2021

Volume: 21

Electronic Location Identifier: 365

Affiliations

[1 ]GRID grid.222754.4, ISNI 0000 0001 0840 2678, Department of Ophthalmology, , Korea University College of Medicine, ; Seoul, Republic of Korea

[2 ]GRID grid.411134.2, ISNI 0000 0004 0474 0479, Department of Ophthalmology, , Korea University Guro Hospital, ; 148 Gurodong-ro, Guro-gu, Seoul, 08308 South Korea

[3 ]GRID grid.411134.2, ISNI 0000 0004 0474 0479, Department of Ophthalmology, , Korea University Ansan Hospital, ; Ansan-si, Gyeonggi-do Republic of Korea

[4 ]GRID grid.15444.30, ISNI 0000 0004 0470 5454, Space Optics Laboratory, Department of Astronomy, , Yonsei University, ; Seoul, Republic of Korea

[5 ]Satellite system 2 Team, Hanwha Systems Co., Ltd., Yongin-si, Gyeonggi-do Republic of Korea

Article

Publisher ID: 2124

DOI: 10.1186/s12886-021-02124-w

PMC ID: 8520272

PubMed ID: 34656091

SO-VID: cfd94370-3f4e-4e43-927d-041c89b6a4b2

License:

Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.