Slide1 l.jpg
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 12

Aspheric Diffractive Versus Refractive Multifocal IOLs: Comparison of Visual Prognosis and Patient Satisfaction PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 328 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Aspheric Diffractive Versus Refractive Multifocal IOLs: Comparison of Visual Prognosis and Patient Satisfaction. Eltutar , Kadir; Akcetin , Tulay A .; Ozcelik , N. Demet. Istanbul Education and Research Hospital Department of Ophthalmology.

Download Presentation

Aspheric Diffractive Versus Refractive Multifocal IOLs: Comparison of Visual Prognosis and Patient Satisfaction

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Slide1 l.jpg

Aspheric Diffractive Versus Refractive Multifocal IOLs: Comparison of Visual Prognosis and Patient Satisfaction

Eltutar, Kadir; Akcetin, Tulay A.; Ozcelik, N. Demet

IstanbulEducationandResearchHospitalDepartment of Ophthalmology

Theauthorsstatethattheyhave no proprietaryinterestandtheyhave not receivedanygrantsorfunds in support of thestudy.


Purpose l.jpg

Purpose:

  • Toevaluate the optical and visual performance after bilateral implantation of refractive and aspheric diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses.


Methods l.jpg

Methods:

  • Theprimaryobjective of thestudywastodeterminetheuncorrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuitiesafter uncomplicatedcataractsurgery, andbilateral MIOL implantation.

  • 10 patients who had bilateral implantation of the aspheric diffractive MIOL (n=20; + 4.00 D add), and 10 patients who had bilateral implantation of the refractive MIOL (n=20, + 3.50 add) wereenrolled.

  • Spectacleindependency, patientsatisfactionandphoticphenomenawereevaluated.

  • Thestudywascarriedoutprospectivelywith a follow-upperiodlastingforsixmonthspostoperatively.


Methods4 l.jpg

Methods:

  • Patients had tofollowtheexaminationdates on postoperativedays 1, 30 and 180.

  • Immersion A-scanbiometrywasusedforaxiallengthmeasurementswithtargetedemmetropiausing SRK-T formula.

  • Distancevisualacuitieswereachievedby ETDRS chart at 4,0 meters, intermediate (60.0 cm) andnear (40.0 cm) visualacuitieswereevaluatedwithJaegercards.


Results l.jpg

Results:

  • Meanfollowup time was 25,30 ± 2,32 (24-30) weeks.

  • Meanage of thepatientswas 63,08 ± 4,20 (48-75 years).

  • Thesepatients had Grade 1-4 bilateralcataract (LOCS III) on baselineexamination.

  • No intraoperativecomplicationsoccurred in any of thecases.

  • PreoperativeandpostoperativeLogMAR UCVA findingsshowedstatisticallysignificantdifference in theasphericdiffractiveandtherefractivegroups (p < 0,05)

  • Consideringuncorrecteddistancevisualacuities , thedifferencebetweentherefractiveandtheasphericdiffractivegroupswas not statisticallysignificant (p>0.05) on postoperativefirstday, firstmonth, andsixthmonthexaminations.


Ucva for distance vision in both groups at certain visits l.jpg

UCVA fordistancevision in bothgroups at certainvisits


Uncorrected near visual acuities on postoperative first day first month and sixth month l.jpg

Uncorrectednearvisualacuities on postoperativefirstday, firstmonthandsixthmonth


Uncorrected intermediate visual acuities at postoperative first day first month and sixth month l.jpg

Uncorrectedintermediatevisualacuities at postoperativefirstday, firstmonthandsixthmonth


Spectacle independency l.jpg

SpectacleIndependency

  • Sixmonthspostoperatively, in asphericdiffractivegroupspectacleindependencyrateswere, 93,6 % fordistance, % 94,2 % fornear, and 88,4 % forintermediatevision.

  • Inrefractivegroupspectacleindependencyrateswere, 94,2 % fordistance, % 90,8 % fornear, and 92,8 % forintermediatevision.

  • Thedifferencewas not statisticallysignificant (p> 0,05).


Slide10 l.jpg

Complications related to phacoemulsification and MIOL implantation

CME: Cystoid Macular Edema

PCO: Posterior Capsular Opacification


Conclusion s l.jpg

Conclusions:

  • Ourresultsshowthat; bilateralimplantation of MIOLswiththesameopticdesignsprovidesefficientdistancevision. There is no superioritybetweenthetwogroupsconsideringuncorrecteddistancevisualacuities.

  • The mean uncorrected near visual acuity was better in the aspheric diffractive group.

  • Themeanuncorrectedintermediatevisualacuitywasbetter in therefractivegroup.

  • Photicphenomenawastolerable in bothgroups. Though not statisticallysignificant, photicphenomenarelateddisturbanceswererelativelylessdetected in theasphericdiffractivegroup at allvisits.


Conclusion s12 l.jpg

Conclusions:

  • ForrefractiveMIOLs, ifpoorlytoleratedbythepatient, photicphenomenamayevenleadtotheextraction of MIOLs. Especially in dimlightconditionssomepatientsmayneedpresbyopiccorrectionbyspectacles, andpatientsmust be warnedabout not drivingforlonghours at night.

  • ForasphericdiffractiveMIOLswith + 4.00 D add, nearvisionwashighlysatisfactory in bothbrightanddimlightconditions. Somepatientsmayneedspectaclesforintermediatevision, whichmightalso be resolvedbypreoperativetargetedmyopiabybiometry, orpreferringdiffractivemiolswithlower presbyopicaddition.


  • Login