Cargando…

Comparative analysis of objective and subjective outcomes of two different intraocular lenses: trifocal and extended range of vision

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate objective and subjective outcomes after bilateral implantation of two different multifocal intraocular lenses, which correct pseudophakic presbyopia in an adequate and homogeneous population court. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Fifty patients were evaluated at 3 months after bilateral...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pedrotti, Emilio, Carones, Francesco, Talli, Pietro, Bonacci, Erika, Selvi, Federico, Galzignato, Alice, Besutti, Andrea, De Gregorio, Alessandra, Marchini, Giorgio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7559032/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33083552
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjophth-2020-000497
_version_ 1783594768056451072
author Pedrotti, Emilio
Carones, Francesco
Talli, Pietro
Bonacci, Erika
Selvi, Federico
Galzignato, Alice
Besutti, Andrea
De Gregorio, Alessandra
Marchini, Giorgio
author_facet Pedrotti, Emilio
Carones, Francesco
Talli, Pietro
Bonacci, Erika
Selvi, Federico
Galzignato, Alice
Besutti, Andrea
De Gregorio, Alessandra
Marchini, Giorgio
author_sort Pedrotti, Emilio
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To evaluate objective and subjective outcomes after bilateral implantation of two different multifocal intraocular lenses, which correct pseudophakic presbyopia in an adequate and homogeneous population court. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Fifty patients were evaluated at 3 months after bilateral implantation, at the Eye Clinic of University of Verona and at the Carones Ophthalmology Center Milano, as follows: Tecnis Symfony (25 patients), Alcon PanOptix (25 patients). Main outcomes were uncorrected and best-corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA and BCVA) at 4 m, 60 cm (best distance corrected intermediate visual acuity (BDCIVA) and uncorrected intermediate visual acuity), 40 cm (best distance corrected near visual acuity (BDCNVA) and uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA)), objective refractive outcome, defocus curve, contrast sensitivity (Modulation Transfer Function (MTF) cut-off), optical quality (Strehl ratio), aberrometry (root mean square RMS 4 mm), subjective quality of life (National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life score (NEI-RQL-42 score) test). RESULTS: Symfony and PanOptix showed BCVA and UDVA comparable results. Symfony presented significant better outcomes at BDCIVA (p=0.001), while PanOptix showed better performances at BDCNVA and UNVA (p=0.01). Symfony achieved better results in RMS 4 mm (p=0.024) and in MTF cut-off (p=0.041). In the questionnaire NEI-RQL-42, PanOptix presented better scores in ‘near vision’ and ‘spectacles independence’, whereas Symfony in ‘symptoms’ and ‘clarity of vision’. CONCLUSION: Both intraocular lenses are valid options to avoid pseudophakic presbyopia, even though they present different features which make them unique. Symfony allows patients to achieve a better objective and subjective quality of vision and contrast sensitivity; PanOptix provides better outcomes in near vision and spectacles independence requirements.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7559032
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75590322020-10-19 Comparative analysis of objective and subjective outcomes of two different intraocular lenses: trifocal and extended range of vision Pedrotti, Emilio Carones, Francesco Talli, Pietro Bonacci, Erika Selvi, Federico Galzignato, Alice Besutti, Andrea De Gregorio, Alessandra Marchini, Giorgio BMJ Open Ophthalmol Original Research OBJECTIVE: To evaluate objective and subjective outcomes after bilateral implantation of two different multifocal intraocular lenses, which correct pseudophakic presbyopia in an adequate and homogeneous population court. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Fifty patients were evaluated at 3 months after bilateral implantation, at the Eye Clinic of University of Verona and at the Carones Ophthalmology Center Milano, as follows: Tecnis Symfony (25 patients), Alcon PanOptix (25 patients). Main outcomes were uncorrected and best-corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA and BCVA) at 4 m, 60 cm (best distance corrected intermediate visual acuity (BDCIVA) and uncorrected intermediate visual acuity), 40 cm (best distance corrected near visual acuity (BDCNVA) and uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA)), objective refractive outcome, defocus curve, contrast sensitivity (Modulation Transfer Function (MTF) cut-off), optical quality (Strehl ratio), aberrometry (root mean square RMS 4 mm), subjective quality of life (National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life score (NEI-RQL-42 score) test). RESULTS: Symfony and PanOptix showed BCVA and UDVA comparable results. Symfony presented significant better outcomes at BDCIVA (p=0.001), while PanOptix showed better performances at BDCNVA and UNVA (p=0.01). Symfony achieved better results in RMS 4 mm (p=0.024) and in MTF cut-off (p=0.041). In the questionnaire NEI-RQL-42, PanOptix presented better scores in ‘near vision’ and ‘spectacles independence’, whereas Symfony in ‘symptoms’ and ‘clarity of vision’. CONCLUSION: Both intraocular lenses are valid options to avoid pseudophakic presbyopia, even though they present different features which make them unique. Symfony allows patients to achieve a better objective and subjective quality of vision and contrast sensitivity; PanOptix provides better outcomes in near vision and spectacles independence requirements. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-10-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7559032/ /pubmed/33083552 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjophth-2020-000497 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Research
Pedrotti, Emilio
Carones, Francesco
Talli, Pietro
Bonacci, Erika
Selvi, Federico
Galzignato, Alice
Besutti, Andrea
De Gregorio, Alessandra
Marchini, Giorgio
Comparative analysis of objective and subjective outcomes of two different intraocular lenses: trifocal and extended range of vision
title Comparative analysis of objective and subjective outcomes of two different intraocular lenses: trifocal and extended range of vision
title_full Comparative analysis of objective and subjective outcomes of two different intraocular lenses: trifocal and extended range of vision
title_fullStr Comparative analysis of objective and subjective outcomes of two different intraocular lenses: trifocal and extended range of vision
title_full_unstemmed Comparative analysis of objective and subjective outcomes of two different intraocular lenses: trifocal and extended range of vision
title_short Comparative analysis of objective and subjective outcomes of two different intraocular lenses: trifocal and extended range of vision
title_sort comparative analysis of objective and subjective outcomes of two different intraocular lenses: trifocal and extended range of vision
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7559032/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33083552
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjophth-2020-000497
work_keys_str_mv AT pedrottiemilio comparativeanalysisofobjectiveandsubjectiveoutcomesoftwodifferentintraocularlensestrifocalandextendedrangeofvision
AT caronesfrancesco comparativeanalysisofobjectiveandsubjectiveoutcomesoftwodifferentintraocularlensestrifocalandextendedrangeofvision
AT tallipietro comparativeanalysisofobjectiveandsubjectiveoutcomesoftwodifferentintraocularlensestrifocalandextendedrangeofvision
AT bonaccierika comparativeanalysisofobjectiveandsubjectiveoutcomesoftwodifferentintraocularlensestrifocalandextendedrangeofvision
AT selvifederico comparativeanalysisofobjectiveandsubjectiveoutcomesoftwodifferentintraocularlensestrifocalandextendedrangeofvision
AT galzignatoalice comparativeanalysisofobjectiveandsubjectiveoutcomesoftwodifferentintraocularlensestrifocalandextendedrangeofvision
AT besuttiandrea comparativeanalysisofobjectiveandsubjectiveoutcomesoftwodifferentintraocularlensestrifocalandextendedrangeofvision
AT degregorioalessandra comparativeanalysisofobjectiveandsubjectiveoutcomesoftwodifferentintraocularlensestrifocalandextendedrangeofvision
AT marchinigiorgio comparativeanalysisofobjectiveandsubjectiveoutcomesoftwodifferentintraocularlensestrifocalandextendedrangeofvision