Cargando…

Clinical Evaluation of a Modified Light Transmission Short-Wavelength Filtering Intraocular Lens Compared to a Colorless Control

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a violet-light filtering intraocular lens (IOL) compared to a colorless IOL control. METHODS: This was a prospective, bilateral, randomized, comparative, patient/evaluator-masked multi-center clinical trial at 12 sites in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chang, Daniel H., Thompson, Vance M., Christie, William C., Chu, Y. Ralph, Vida, Ryan S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10164208/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37071325
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40123-023-00709-w
_version_ 1785038022961528832
author Chang, Daniel H.
Thompson, Vance M.
Christie, William C.
Chu, Y. Ralph
Vida, Ryan S.
author_facet Chang, Daniel H.
Thompson, Vance M.
Christie, William C.
Chu, Y. Ralph
Vida, Ryan S.
author_sort Chang, Daniel H.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a violet-light filtering intraocular lens (IOL) compared to a colorless IOL control. METHODS: This was a prospective, bilateral, randomized, comparative, patient/evaluator-masked multi-center clinical trial at 12 sites in the USA. Patients underwent standard small-incision phacoemulsification cataract extraction. Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and color vision were tested 12 months postoperatively. Patient satisfaction and vision-related quality of life were evaluated based on directed patient responses obtained from a binocular subjective questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 250 subjects were bilaterally implanted with the violet-light filtering TECNIS monofocal ZV9003 (n = 126) and colorless TECNIS monofocal ZA9003 (n = 124). Mean uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was 0.123 LogMAR for ZV9003 and 0.116 LogMAR for the ZA9003 group. Mean corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was 0.00 LogMAR for both groups. No significant difference was found between the groups for 22/25 questionnaire categories, including color perception. A significant difference was found in favor of the ZV9003 group for day driving, night driving, and frustration with vision. Contrast sensitivity mean difference was < 0.05 log units across all lighting conditions and spatial frequencies. CONCLUSION: No difference was found between groups for visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, color testing, and adverse events as well as with the majority of optical/visual symptoms. A statistical difference was noted in driving and frustration with eyesight that may be related to benefits of using a violet-light filtering chromophore. Overall, the violet-light filtering ZV9003 showed excellent visual acuity and contrast sensitivity results with a low incidence of optical/visual symptoms. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40123-023-00709-w.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10164208
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101642082023-05-08 Clinical Evaluation of a Modified Light Transmission Short-Wavelength Filtering Intraocular Lens Compared to a Colorless Control Chang, Daniel H. Thompson, Vance M. Christie, William C. Chu, Y. Ralph Vida, Ryan S. Ophthalmol Ther Original Research INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a violet-light filtering intraocular lens (IOL) compared to a colorless IOL control. METHODS: This was a prospective, bilateral, randomized, comparative, patient/evaluator-masked multi-center clinical trial at 12 sites in the USA. Patients underwent standard small-incision phacoemulsification cataract extraction. Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and color vision were tested 12 months postoperatively. Patient satisfaction and vision-related quality of life were evaluated based on directed patient responses obtained from a binocular subjective questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 250 subjects were bilaterally implanted with the violet-light filtering TECNIS monofocal ZV9003 (n = 126) and colorless TECNIS monofocal ZA9003 (n = 124). Mean uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was 0.123 LogMAR for ZV9003 and 0.116 LogMAR for the ZA9003 group. Mean corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was 0.00 LogMAR for both groups. No significant difference was found between the groups for 22/25 questionnaire categories, including color perception. A significant difference was found in favor of the ZV9003 group for day driving, night driving, and frustration with vision. Contrast sensitivity mean difference was < 0.05 log units across all lighting conditions and spatial frequencies. CONCLUSION: No difference was found between groups for visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, color testing, and adverse events as well as with the majority of optical/visual symptoms. A statistical difference was noted in driving and frustration with eyesight that may be related to benefits of using a violet-light filtering chromophore. Overall, the violet-light filtering ZV9003 showed excellent visual acuity and contrast sensitivity results with a low incidence of optical/visual symptoms. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40123-023-00709-w. Springer Healthcare 2023-04-18 2023-06 /pmc/articles/PMC10164208/ /pubmed/37071325 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40123-023-00709-w Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial 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-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Research
Chang, Daniel H.
Thompson, Vance M.
Christie, William C.
Chu, Y. Ralph
Vida, Ryan S.
Clinical Evaluation of a Modified Light Transmission Short-Wavelength Filtering Intraocular Lens Compared to a Colorless Control
title Clinical Evaluation of a Modified Light Transmission Short-Wavelength Filtering Intraocular Lens Compared to a Colorless Control
title_full Clinical Evaluation of a Modified Light Transmission Short-Wavelength Filtering Intraocular Lens Compared to a Colorless Control
title_fullStr Clinical Evaluation of a Modified Light Transmission Short-Wavelength Filtering Intraocular Lens Compared to a Colorless Control
title_full_unstemmed Clinical Evaluation of a Modified Light Transmission Short-Wavelength Filtering Intraocular Lens Compared to a Colorless Control
title_short Clinical Evaluation of a Modified Light Transmission Short-Wavelength Filtering Intraocular Lens Compared to a Colorless Control
title_sort clinical evaluation of a modified light transmission short-wavelength filtering intraocular lens compared to a colorless control
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10164208/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37071325
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40123-023-00709-w
work_keys_str_mv AT changdanielh clinicalevaluationofamodifiedlighttransmissionshortwavelengthfilteringintraocularlenscomparedtoacolorlesscontrol
AT thompsonvancem clinicalevaluationofamodifiedlighttransmissionshortwavelengthfilteringintraocularlenscomparedtoacolorlesscontrol
AT christiewilliamc clinicalevaluationofamodifiedlighttransmissionshortwavelengthfilteringintraocularlenscomparedtoacolorlesscontrol
AT chuyralph clinicalevaluationofamodifiedlighttransmissionshortwavelengthfilteringintraocularlenscomparedtoacolorlesscontrol
AT vidaryans clinicalevaluationofamodifiedlighttransmissionshortwavelengthfilteringintraocularlenscomparedtoacolorlesscontrol