[Long-term clinical observation of aspheric multifocal intraocular lens implantation]
- PMID: 28851201
- DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0412-4081.2017.08.008
[Long-term clinical observation of aspheric multifocal intraocular lens implantation]
Abstract
Objective: To observe the clinical effect of long term visual quality after the implantation of the aspheric diffractive multifocal intraocular lens. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study.One hundred and thirty cases of age-related cataract (170 eyes) after phacoemulsification cataract extraction combined with IOL implantation were collected from September of 2009 to January of 2011 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University.There were 42 patients (57 eyes) with aspheric multifocal group, 43 patients (57 eyes) in the aspheric group and 45 patients (56 eyes) in the spherical group according to the different types of IOL implanted.At 1 year, 3 years and 5 years after operation, the following parameters were assessed: uncorrected and best corrected distance, medium and near vision acuity, contrast sensitivity, wavefront aberrations, modulation transfer functions (MTF), stereopsis, visual function and quality of life (VF/QOL) questionnaire survey. Results: At 1 year, 3 years and 5 years after operation, the uncorrected medium visual acuity in aspheric diffractive multifocal IOL group(0.30(0.10, 0.50), 0.30(0.10, 1.00), 0.30(0.10, 0.50)) was better than that of eyes in aspheric IOL group(0.40 (0.10, 0.0), 0.40 (0.20, 1.00), 0.40 (0.20, 0.50)) (Z(1)=-3.32,-1.73,-3.01, P(1)=0.00, 0.01, 0.00) and spherical IOL group (0.40(0.30, 1.00), 0.40(0.20, 1.00), 0.40(0.20, 1.00)) (Z(2)=-5.77,-3.19,-4.49, P(2)=0.00, 0.00, 0.00).And the near vision in aspheric diffractive multifocal IOL group(0.25(0.00, 1.00), 0.30(0.00, 1.00), 0.30(0.00, 1.00)) was also obviously better than that of eyes in aspheric IOL group (0.50(0.18, 1.00), 0.50(0.18, 1.00), 0.50(0.18, 1.00)) (Z(1)=-5.57,-5.37,-4.93, P(1)=0.00, 0.00, 0.00) and spherical IOL group(0.60(0.18, 1.00), 0.60(0.18, 1.00), 0.60(0.18, 1.00)) (Z(2)=-7.00,-6.91,-6.53, P(2)=0.00, 0.00, 0.00). At 5 years after operation, the mean higher-order aberration for 3.0mm and 5.0mm optical zone in aspheric diffractive multifocal IOL group (0.21(0.03, 0.46), 0.37(0.12, 2.01)) were significantly lower than that in spherical IOL group (0.43(0.10, 1.91), 0.46 (0.10, 1.91) ) (Z(2)=-4.81,-1.97, P(2)=0.00, 0.01).But there was no statistical difference between the aspheric diffractive multifocal and aspheric IOL group (0.21(0.03, 1.17), 0.34(0.06, 1.74)) (Z(1)=-0.10,-1.81, P(1)=0.92, 0.07).The mean spherical aberration for 3.0mm and 5.0mm optical zone in aspheric diffractive multifocal IOL group (0.01(-0.01, 0.20), 0.03(-0.10, 0.20)) were significantly lower than that in spherical IOL group (0.29(0.10, 0.99), 0.32(0.10, 0.99)) (Z(2)=-8.48,-8.54, P(2)=0.00, 0.01).But there was no statistical differences between the aspheric diffractive multifocal and aspheric IOL group (0.02(-0.09, 0.37), 0.04(-0.09, 0.37)) (Z(1)=-0.60,-0.73, P(1)=0.55, 0.46).About 86% of patients in aspheric diffractive multifocal IOL group do not need to wear glasses, it was better than the other two groups (χ(2)=17.83, 24.45, P=0.00, 0.00).The incidence of night glare and halo in aspheric diffractive multifocal IOL group 16/50(32%) was higher than that of aspherical IOL group 5/50(10%) and spherical IOL group 3/50(6%), and the difference was statistically significant (χ(2)=7.29, 10.98, P=0.00, 0.00).The overall satisfaction in aspheric diffractive multifocal IOL group was 45/50 (90%), better than that of aspherical IOL group 29/50(58%) and spherical IOL group 20/50(40%), and the difference was statistically significant (χ(2)=13.31, 27.47, P=0.00, 0.00). Conclusions: The aspheric diffractive multifocal IOL can provide patients with good and stable far, medium and near vision, to meet the needs of patients without glasses.At the same time, it can effectively reduce the high order aberrations and spherical aberration, improve visual quality.But due to night glare and glow, it does not apply to professional drivers and nighttime drivers. (Chin J Ophthalmol, 2017, 53: 599-609).
目的: 观察衍射型非球面多焦点人工晶状体(IOL)植入术后的远期视觉质量。 方法: 回顾性队列研究。收集2009年9月至2011年1月在郑州大学第一附属医院眼科行超声乳化白内障吸除联合IOL植入术的白内障患者130例(170只眼),其中男性67例,女性63例,年龄50.0~78.0岁,平均(66.5±10.1)岁。依据术中植入的IOL的不同类型分为3组:非球面多焦组42例(57只眼)、非球面组43例(57只眼)、球面组45例(56只眼)。分别于术后1年、3年、5年,观察裸眼及矫正远、中、近视力;昼夜有、无眩光的对比敏感度;以i-Traee视觉功能分析仪分析眼内像差、调制传递函数;远、近立体视觉;远期并发症及生活质量问卷调查。对术前计数资料行χ(2)检验;对所有计量数据资料先行正态分布检验,符合正态分布的术前数据再行方差齐性检验和单因素方差分析;对术后不同的指标评价时先行3组间非参数Kruskal-Wallis检验;有差异者两两组间再行非参数Mann-Whimey U检验比较。 结果: 术后1年、3年和5年,非球面多焦点组裸眼中视力[0.30(0.10,0.50)、0.30(0.10,1.00)、0.30(0.10,0.50)]优于非球面组[0.40(0.10,0.70)、0.40(0.20,1.00)、0.40(0.20,0.50)],差异有统计学意义(Z(1)=-3.32、-1.73、-3.01,P(1)=0.00、0.01、0.00);亦优于球面组[0.40(0.30,1.00)、0.40(0.20,1.00)、0.40(0.20,1.00)],差异亦有统计学意义(Z(2)=-5.77、-3.19、-4.49,P(2)=0.00、0.00、0.00);非球面多焦点组裸眼近视力[0.25(0.00,1.00)、0.30(0.00,1.00)、0.30(0.00,1.00)]优于非球面组[0.50(0.18,1.00)、0.50(0.18,1.00)、0.50(0.18,1.00)],差异有统计学意义(Z(1)=-5.57、-5.37、-4.93,P(1)=0.00、0.00、0.00);亦优于球面组[0.60(0.18,1.00)、0.60(0.18,1.00)、0.60(0.18,1.00)],差异亦有统计学意义(Z(2)=-7.00、-6.91、-6.53,P(2)=0.00、0.00、0.00)。术后5年,在瞳孔直径分别为3.0、5.0 mm时,非球面多焦点组[0.21((0.03,0.46)、0.37(0.12,2.01)]的高阶总像差低于球面组[0.43(0.10,1.91)、0.46(0.10,1.91)],差异有统计学意义(Z(2)=-4.81、-1.97,P(2)=0.00、0.01);而与非球面组[0.21(0.03,1.17)、0.34(0.06,1.74)]相比,差异无统计学意义(Z(1)=-0.10、-1.81,P(1)=0.92、0.07)。非球面多焦点组[0.01(-0.01,0.20)、0.03(-0.10,0.20)]的球面像差低于球面组[0.29(0.10,0.99)、0.32(0.10,0.99)],差异有统计学意义(Z(2)=-8.48、-8.54,P(2)=0.00、0.01);而与非球面组[0.02(-0.09,0.37)、0.04(-0.09,0.37)]相比,差异无统计学意义(Z(1)=-0.60、-0.73,P(1)=0.55、0.46)。非球面多焦点组视近脱镜率43/50(86%)明显优于非球面组23/50(46%)和球面组19/50(38%),差异有统计学意义(χ(2)=17.83、24.45,P=0.00、0.00)。夜眩光和光晕发生率,非球面多焦组16/50(32%)高于非球面组5/50(10%)和球面组3/50(6%),差异有统计学意义(χ(2)=7.29、10.98,P=0.00、0.00);总体满意度为非球面多焦点组45/50(90%),高于非球面组29/50(58%)和球面组20/50(40%),差异有统计学意义(χ(2)=13.31、27.47,P=0.00、0.00)。 结论: 衍射型非球面多焦点IOL植入后能为患者提供良好而稳定的远、中、近全程视力,可满足患者的脱镜需求,同时可有效减少术眼的高阶像差及球面像差,改善视觉质量。但由于夜间的眩光和光晕,不适用于职业司机和常夜间驾驶者。(中华眼科杂志,2017,53:599-609).
Keywords: Contrast sensitivity; Lens implantation, intraocular; Lenses, intraocular.
Similar articles
-
[Clinical observation on visual quality in patients implanted with monofocal and multifocal aspheric intraocular lenses].Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2010 Aug;46(8):686-90. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2010. PMID: 21054991 Clinical Trial. Chinese.
-
[Binocular clinical comparison study of Tecnis multifocal aspheric and monofocal spherical intraocular lenses].Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2010 Jul;46(7):625-30. Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2010. PMID: 21054971 Clinical Trial. Chinese.
-
One-year outcomes with new-generation multifocal intraocular lenses.Ophthalmology. 2008 Sep;115(9):1508-16. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.04.017. Epub 2008 Jun 5. Ophthalmology. 2008. PMID: 18538402 Clinical Trial.
-
[Multifocal intraocular lenses--an assessment of current status].Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 1993 Jul;203(1):19-33. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1045645. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 1993. PMID: 8411889 Review. German.
-
Ocular wavefront analysis of aspheric compared with spherical monofocal intraocular lenses in cataract surgery: Systematic review with metaanalysis.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015 May;41(5):1088-97. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.04.005. Epub 2015 May 6. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015. PMID: 25956711
Cited by
-
Quantitative assessment of photic phenomena in the presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens.PLoS One. 2021 Dec 1;16(12):e0260406. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260406. eCollection 2021. PLoS One. 2021. PMID: 34851975 Free PMC article.
-
Visual quality and performance following bilateral implantation of TECNIS Symfony intraocular lenses with or without micro-monovision.Clin Ophthalmol. 2019 Jun 28;13:1071-1077. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S202380. eCollection 2019. Clin Ophthalmol. 2019. PMID: 31388295 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous