The relationship between patient satisfaction and visual and optical outcome after bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus multifocal intraocular lens
The relationship between patient satisfaction and visual and optical outcome after bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus multifocal intraocular lens
- 眼科实践与研究新进展 2022年2卷第1期 页码：100043
- 作者机构：
1. ,Vienna,Austria
2. ,Vienna,Austria
- 作者简介：
- 基金信息：
DOI：10.1016/j.aopr.2022.100043
中图分类号：
扫 描 看 全 文
The relationship between patient satisfaction and visual and optical outcome after bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus multifocal intraocular lens[J]. 眼科实践与研究新进展, 2022,2(1):100043.
Kata Miháltz, Stephan Szegedi, Jolanda Steininger, et al. The relationship between patient satisfaction and visual and optical outcome after bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus multifocal intraocular lens[J]. AOPR, 2022,2(1):100043.
The relationship between patient satisfaction and visual and optical outcome after bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus multifocal intraocular lens[J]. 眼科实践与研究新进展, 2022,2(1):100043. DOI： 10.1016/j.aopr.2022.100043.
Kata Miháltz, Stephan Szegedi, Jolanda Steininger, et al. The relationship between patient satisfaction and visual and optical outcome after bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus multifocal intraocular lens[J]. AOPR, 2022,2(1):100043. DOI： 10.1016/j.aopr.2022.100043.
摘要
Purpose,To evaluate patient satisfaction after implantation of the Tecnis Symfony multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL).,Methods,120 eyes of 60 subjects with senile cataract were bilaterally implanted with the Tecnis Symfony IOL. Follow-up examination was performed 6 months postoperatively. Main outcome measures included uncorrected and corrected distance and near visual acuity, manifest refraction, and visual quality metrics. According to their subjective symptoms patient were divided in two groups: satisfied and unsatisfied.,Results,Uncorrected intermediate (0.15 ± 0.11 vs 0.18 ± 0.01,P, = 0.04) and near (0.26 ± 0.12 vs 0.31 ± 0.11,P, = 0.04) (UIVA, UNVA) log MAR visual acuity was significantly better, cylindrical error less (0.31 ± 0.36 vs 0.67 ± 0.29,P, = 0.05), axial length (AL) smaller (23.68 ± 1.3 vs 24.22 ± 1.6,P, = 0.05), Strehl ratio higher (0.08 ± 0.08 vs 0.05 ± 0.04,P, = 0.03) and mesopic pupil larger (4.3 ± 1.1 vs 3.7 ± 1.05,P, = 0.01) among satisfied patients.Residual cylinder, Strehl ratio, halos, mesopic pupil diameter and UNVA were significant predictors of patient satisfaction. Uncorrected distance visual acuity, higher order Strehl ratio and pupil diameter were significant predictors of halos. Near visual acuity significantly correlated (,P, = 0.018, R = 0.22) with axial length.,Conclusions,Uncorrected cylindrical error, poor reading quality, larger pupil and halos seem to be the most disturbing factors for patients implanted with the Tecnis Symfony IOL.
Abstract
Purpose,To evaluate patient satisfaction after implantation of the Tecnis Symfony multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL).,Methods,120 eyes of 60 subjects with senile cataract were bilaterally implanted with the Tecnis Symfony IOL. Follow-up examination was performed 6 months postoperatively. Main outcome measures included uncorrected and corrected distance and near visual acuity, manifest refraction, and visual quality metrics. According to their subjective symptoms patient were divided in two groups: satisfied and unsatisfied.,Results,Uncorrected intermediate (0.15 ± 0.11 vs 0.18 ± 0.01,P, = 0.04) and near (0.26 ± 0.12 vs 0.31 ± 0.11,P, = 0.04) (UIVA, UNVA) log MAR visual acuity was significantly better, cylindrical error less (0.31 ± 0.36 vs 0.67 ± 0.29,P, = 0.05), axial length (AL) smaller (23.68 ± 1.3 vs 24.22 ± 1.6,P, = 0.05), Strehl ratio higher (0.08 ± 0.08 vs 0.05 ± 0.04,P, = 0.03) and mesopic pupil larger (4.3 ± 1.1 vs 3.7 ± 1.05,P, = 0.01) among satisfied patients.Residual cylinder, Strehl ratio, halos, mesopic pupil diameter and UNVA were significant predictors of patient satisfaction. Uncorrected distance visual acuity, higher order Strehl ratio and pupil diameter were significant predictors of halos. Near visual acuity significantly correlated (,P, = 0.018, R = 0.22) with axial length.,Conclusions,Uncorrected cylindrical error, poor reading quality, larger pupil and halos seem to be the most disturbing factors for patients implanted with the Tecnis Symfony IOL.
关键词
Keywords
Multifocal IOLEDOFPatient satisfactionOptical quality
references
1 J.L. Alio, A.B. Plaza-Puche, R. Férnandez-Buenaga, et al.Multifocal intraocular lenses: an overview Surv Ophthalmol, 62 (2017), pp. 611-634, 10.1016/j.survophthal.2017.03.005
2 D. Ortiz, J.L. Alió, G. Bernabéu, et al.Optical performance of monofocal and multifocal intraocular lenses in the human eye J Cataract Refract Surg, 34 (2008), pp. 755-762, 10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.12.038
3 A. Grzybowski, P. Kanclerz, R. TuuminenMultifocal intraocular lenses and retinal diseases Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 258 (2020), pp. 805-813, 10.1007/s00417-020-04603-0
4 M.R. Santhiago, S.E. Wilson, M.V. Netto, et al.Modulation transfer function and optical quality after bilateral implantation of a +3.00 D versus a +4.00 D multifocal intraocular lens J Cataract Refract Surg, 38 (2012), pp. 215-220, 10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.08.029
5 R. Braga-Mele, D. Chang, S. Dewey, et al.Multifocal intraocular lenses: relative indications and contraindications for implantation J Cataract Refract Surg, 40 (2014), pp. 313-322, 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.12.011
6 D.R. Piñero, M.J. Ayala Espinosa, J.L. AlióLASIK outcomes following multifocal and monofocal intraocular lens implantation J Refract Surg, 26 (2010), pp. 569-577, 10.3928/1081597X-20091030-02
7 P. Rudalevicius, R. Lekaviciene, G.U. Auffarth, et al.Relations between patient personality and patients’ dissatisfaction after multifocal intraocular lens implantation: clinical study based on the five factor inventory personality evaluation Eye, 34 (2020), pp. 717-724, 10.1038/s41433-019-0585-x
8 H.P. Sandoval, S. Lane, S.G. Slade, et al.Defocus curve and patient satisfaction with a new extended depth of focus toric intraocular lens targeted for binocular emmetropia or slight myopia in the non-dominant eye Clin Ophthalmol, 26 (2020), pp. 1791-1798, 10.2147/OPTH.S247333
9 D.P. Piñero, P.J. Sánchez-Pérez, J.L. AlióRepeatability of measurements obtained with a ray tracing aberrometer Optom Vis Sci, 88 (2011), pp. 1099-1105, 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3182223788
10 N. Visser, T.T. Berendschot, F. Verbakel, et al.Evaluation of the comparability and repeatability of four wavefront aberrometers Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 52 (2011), pp. 1302-1311, 10.1167/iovs.10-5841
11 K. Miháltz, P.V. Vécsei-MarlovitsThe impact of visual axis position on the optical quality after implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses with different asphericity values Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 259 (2021), pp. 673-683, 10.1007/s00417-020-05052-5
12 D. Gatinel, J. LoicqClinically relevant optical properties of bifocal, trifocal, and extended depth of focus intraocular lenses J Refract Surg, 32 (2016), pp. 273-280, 10.3928/1081597X-20160121-07
13 P. Kanclerz, F. Toto, A. Grzybowski, et al.Extended depth-of-field intraocular lenses: an update Asia Pac J Ophthalmol, 9 (2020), pp. 194-202, 10.1097/APO.0000000000000296
14 H.P. Sandoval, S. Lane, S. Slade, et al.Extended depth-of-focus toric intraocular lens targeted for binocular emmetropia or slight myopia in the nondominant eye: visual and refractive clinical outcomes J Cataract Refract Surg, 45 (2019), pp. 1398-1403, 10.1016/j.jcrs.2019.05.019
15 H.A. Weeber, S.T. Meijer, P.A. PiersExtending the range of vision using diffractive intraocular lens technology J Cataract Refract Surg, 41 (2015), pp. 2746-2754, 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.07.034
16 G. Savini, P. Barboni, P. Ducoli, et al.Influence of intraocular lens haptic design on refractive error J Cataract Refract Surg, 40 (2014), pp. 1473-1478, 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.12.018
17 M. Lombardo, G. LombardoWave aberration of human eyes and new descriptors of image optical quality and visual performance J Cataract Refract Surg, 36 (2010), pp. 313-331, 10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.09.026
18 J.A. Hanley, A. Negassa, M.D.B. Edwardes, et al.Statistical analysis of correlated data using generalized estimating equations: an orientation Am J Epidemiol, 157 (2003), pp. 364-375, 10.1093/aje/kwf215
19 A. Grzybowski, P. Kanclerz, M. Muzyka-WoźniakMethods for evaluating quality of life and vision in patients undergoing lens refractive surgery Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 257 (2019), pp. 1091-1099, 10.1007/s00417-019-04270-w
20 S. BlackA clinical assessment of visual performance of combining the TECNIS( ) Symfony Extended Range of Vision IOL (ZXR00) with the +3.25 D TECNIS Multifocal 1-piece IOL (ZLB00) in subjects undergoing bilateral cataract extraction Clin Ophthalmol, 23 (2018), pp. 2129-2136, 10.2147/OPTH.S175901
21 B. Cochener, G. Boutillier, M. Lamard, et al.A comparative evaluation of a new generation of diffractive trifocal and extended depth of focus intraocular lenses J Refract Surg, 34 (2018), pp. 507-514, 10.3928/1081597X-20180530-02
22 M. Schojai, T. Schultz, C. Jerke, et al.Visual performance comparison of 2 extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses J Cataract Refract Surg, 46 (2020), pp. 388-393, 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000068
23 B.P. BarnettFOCUSED (femtosecond optimized continuous uncorrected sight with EDOF and diffractive multifocal IOLs) - a review Curr Opin Ophthalmol, 32 (2021), pp. 3-12, 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000723
24 D.R.H. Breyer, L. Beckers, T. Ax, et al.Current review: multifocal intraocular lenses and extended depth of focus intraocular lenses Klin Monbl Augenheilkd, 237 (2020), pp. 943-957, 10.1055/a-1111-9380
25 T. Reinhard, P. Maier, D. Böhringer, et al.Comparison of two extended depth of focus intraocular lenses with a monofocal lens: a multi-centre randomised trial Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 259 (2021), pp. 431-442, 10.1007/s00417-020-04868-5
26 G. Łabuz, G.U. Auffarth, A. Özen, et al.The effect of a spectral filter on visual quality in patients with an extended-depth-of-focus intraocular lens Am J Ophthalmol, 208 (2019), pp. 56-63, 10.1016/j.ajo.2019.07.001
27 M.S. Millán, F. VegaExtended depth of focus intraocular lens: chromatic performance Biomed Opt Express, 8 (2017), pp. 4294-4309, 10.1364/BOE.8.004294
28 M.A. Jackson, A.M. Edmiston, R. BediOptimum refractive target in patients with bilateral implantation of extended depth of focus intraocular lenses Clin Ophthalmol, 18 (2020), pp. 455-462, 10.2147/OPTH.S237457
29 G. Savini, K.J. Hoffer, M. Lombardo, et al.Influence of the effective lens position, as predicted by axial length and keratometry, on the near add power of multifocal intraocular lenses J Cataract Refract Surg, 42 (2016), pp. 44-49, 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.07.044
30 K.G. GundersenRotational stability and visual performance 3 months after bilateral implantation of a new toric extended range of vision intraocular lens Clin Ophthalmol, 18 (2018), pp. 1269-1278, 10.2147/OPTH.S173120
31 B.S. Lee, A.C. Onishi, D.F. ChangComparison of rotational stability and repositioning rates of 2 presbyopia-correcting and 2 monofocal toric intraocular lenses J Cataract Refract Surg, 47 (2021), pp. 622-626, 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000497
32 N. Hirnschall, O. Findl, N. Bayer, et al.Sources of error in toric intraocular lens power calculation J Refract Surg, 36 (10) (2020), pp. 646-652, 10.3928/1081597X-20200729-03
33 L. Lipsky, G. BarrettComparison of toric intraocular lens alignment error with different toric markers J Cataract Refract Surg, 45 (2019), pp. 1597-1601, 10.1016/j.jcrs.2019.06.013
34 K. Miháltz, P.V. Vécsei-MarlovitsThe impact of visual axis position on the optical quality after implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses with different asphericity values Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 259 (2021), pp. 673-683, 10.1007/s00417-020-05052-5
35 J.L. Alió, A.B. Plaza-Puche, J. Javaloy, et al.Comparison of the visual and intraocular optical performance of a refractive multifocal IOL with rotational asymmetry and an apodized diffractive multifocal IOL J Refract Surg, 28 (2012), pp. 100-105, 10.3928/1081597X-20120110-01
36 I. Jun, Y.J. Choi, E.K. Kim, et al.Internal spherical aberration by ray tracing-type aberrometry in multifocal pseudophakic eyes Eye, 26 (2012), pp. 1243-1248, 10.1038/eye.2012.129
37 C. Palomino-Bautista, R. Sánchez-Jean, D. Carmona-Gonzalez, et al.Depth of field measures in pseudophakic eyes implanted with different type of presbyopia-correcting IOLS Sci Rep, 11 (2021), p. 12081, 10.1038/s41598-021-91654-w
38 K. Cao, D.S. Friedman, S. Jin, et al.Multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses for age-related cataract patients: a system review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials Surv Ophthalmol, 64 (2019), pp. 647-658, 10.1016/j.survophthal.2019.02.012
39 N.E. de Vries, C.A. Webers, W.R. Touwslager, et al.Nuijts RM Dissatisfaction after implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses J Cataract Refract Surg, 37 (2011), pp. 859-865, 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.11.032
0
浏览量
0
下载量
0
CSCD
- Meta-XML下载
- BibTeX下载
- Endnote下载
- RefMan 下载
- NoteExpress下载
- NoteFirst下载
关联资源
相关文章
相关作者
相关机构
- 技术支持由北京北大方正电子有限公司提供 京ICP备09064830号-19
京公网安备11010802024621 - 本系统建议在Chrome、 IE9+ 以上版本浏览器阅读本站内容，360浏览器请切换至极速模式
- Cookies帮助我们提供服务并提供个性化体验。使用本网站，即表示您同意我们使用Cookies