Cargando…
A comparison of clinical outcomes and optical performance between monofocal and new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses: a case-control study
BACKGROUND: To compare clinical outcomes and optical performance of a new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses (IOLs) with that of conventional monofocal IOLs. METHODS: Sixty eyes of 30 patients who underwent phacoemulsification with bilateral implantation of the ICB00 (1...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8520272/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34656091 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-021-02124-w |
_version_ | 1784584635467956224 |
---|---|
author | Huh, Jungah Eom, Youngsub Yang, Seul Ki Choi, Young Kim, Hyo Myung Song, Jong Suk |
author_facet | Huh, Jungah Eom, Youngsub Yang, Seul Ki Choi, Young Kim, Hyo Myung Song, Jong Suk |
author_sort | Huh, Jungah |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: To compare clinical outcomes and optical performance of a new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses (IOLs) with that of conventional monofocal IOLs. METHODS: Sixty eyes of 30 patients who underwent phacoemulsification with bilateral implantation of the ICB00 (15 patients) or ZCB00 (15 patients) IOLs were enrolled. Binocular corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), distance corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA), and distance corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA) were measured at 4 weeks after surgery. Patient satisfaction for overall, near, intermediate, and distance vision were assessed. The binocular defocus curves were measured. The root mean square of modulation transfer function (MTF(RMS)) was measured in the optical bench study. RESULTS: The mean binocular DCIVA was significantly better in the ICB00 group (0.01 logMAR) compared to the ZCB00 group (0.13 logMAR), but CDVA and DCNVA were not. The patient satisfaction for near and intermediate vision was significantly higher in the ICB00 group compared to the ZCB00. However, there was no difference in patient satisfaction for overall and distance vision between two groups. The defocus curves showed that mean visual acuity of the ICB00 group was significantly better than that of the ZCB00 group at between − 1.00 D to − 3.00 D of defocus. The ICB00 IOL had higher MTF(RMS) values at between − 0.50 D to − 2.00 D of defocus compared to the ZCB00 IOL. CONCLUSIONS: The ICB00 IOL provides better binocular intermediate vision and higher satisfaction for near and intermediate vision than the ZCB00 IOL while maintaining excellent distance vision. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8520272 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-85202722021-10-20 A comparison of clinical outcomes and optical performance between monofocal and new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses: a case-control study Huh, Jungah Eom, Youngsub Yang, Seul Ki Choi, Young Kim, Hyo Myung Song, Jong Suk BMC Ophthalmol Research BACKGROUND: To compare clinical outcomes and optical performance of a new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses (IOLs) with that of conventional monofocal IOLs. METHODS: Sixty eyes of 30 patients who underwent phacoemulsification with bilateral implantation of the ICB00 (15 patients) or ZCB00 (15 patients) IOLs were enrolled. Binocular corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), distance corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA), and distance corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA) were measured at 4 weeks after surgery. Patient satisfaction for overall, near, intermediate, and distance vision were assessed. The binocular defocus curves were measured. The root mean square of modulation transfer function (MTF(RMS)) was measured in the optical bench study. RESULTS: The mean binocular DCIVA was significantly better in the ICB00 group (0.01 logMAR) compared to the ZCB00 group (0.13 logMAR), but CDVA and DCNVA were not. The patient satisfaction for near and intermediate vision was significantly higher in the ICB00 group compared to the ZCB00. However, there was no difference in patient satisfaction for overall and distance vision between two groups. The defocus curves showed that mean visual acuity of the ICB00 group was significantly better than that of the ZCB00 group at between − 1.00 D to − 3.00 D of defocus. The ICB00 IOL had higher MTF(RMS) values at between − 0.50 D to − 2.00 D of defocus compared to the ZCB00 IOL. CONCLUSIONS: The ICB00 IOL provides better binocular intermediate vision and higher satisfaction for near and intermediate vision than the ZCB00 IOL while maintaining excellent distance vision. BioMed Central 2021-10-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8520272/ /pubmed/34656091 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-021-02124-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits 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/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Huh, Jungah Eom, Youngsub Yang, Seul Ki Choi, Young Kim, Hyo Myung Song, Jong Suk A comparison of clinical outcomes and optical performance between monofocal and new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses: a case-control study |
title | A comparison of clinical outcomes and optical performance between monofocal and new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses: a case-control study |
title_full | A comparison of clinical outcomes and optical performance between monofocal and new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses: a case-control study |
title_fullStr | A comparison of clinical outcomes and optical performance between monofocal and new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses: a case-control study |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of clinical outcomes and optical performance between monofocal and new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses: a case-control study |
title_short | A comparison of clinical outcomes and optical performance between monofocal and new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses: a case-control study |
title_sort | comparison of clinical outcomes and optical performance between monofocal and new monofocal with enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses: a case-control study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8520272/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34656091 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-021-02124-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT huhjungah acomparisonofclinicaloutcomesandopticalperformancebetweenmonofocalandnewmonofocalwithenhancedintermediatefunctionintraocularlensesacasecontrolstudy AT eomyoungsub acomparisonofclinicaloutcomesandopticalperformancebetweenmonofocalandnewmonofocalwithenhancedintermediatefunctionintraocularlensesacasecontrolstudy AT yangseulki acomparisonofclinicaloutcomesandopticalperformancebetweenmonofocalandnewmonofocalwithenhancedintermediatefunctionintraocularlensesacasecontrolstudy AT choiyoung acomparisonofclinicaloutcomesandopticalperformancebetweenmonofocalandnewmonofocalwithenhancedintermediatefunctionintraocularlensesacasecontrolstudy AT kimhyomyung acomparisonofclinicaloutcomesandopticalperformancebetweenmonofocalandnewmonofocalwithenhancedintermediatefunctionintraocularlensesacasecontrolstudy AT songjongsuk acomparisonofclinicaloutcomesandopticalperformancebetweenmonofocalandnewmonofocalwithenhancedintermediatefunctionintraocularlensesacasecontrolstudy AT huhjungah comparisonofclinicaloutcomesandopticalperformancebetweenmonofocalandnewmonofocalwithenhancedintermediatefunctionintraocularlensesacasecontrolstudy AT eomyoungsub comparisonofclinicaloutcomesandopticalperformancebetweenmonofocalandnewmonofocalwithenhancedintermediatefunctionintraocularlensesacasecontrolstudy AT yangseulki comparisonofclinicaloutcomesandopticalperformancebetweenmonofocalandnewmonofocalwithenhancedintermediatefunctionintraocularlensesacasecontrolstudy AT choiyoung comparisonofclinicaloutcomesandopticalperformancebetweenmonofocalandnewmonofocalwithenhancedintermediatefunctionintraocularlensesacasecontrolstudy AT kimhyomyung comparisonofclinicaloutcomesandopticalperformancebetweenmonofocalandnewmonofocalwithenhancedintermediatefunctionintraocularlensesacasecontrolstudy AT songjongsuk comparisonofclinicaloutcomesandopticalperformancebetweenmonofocalandnewmonofocalwithenhancedintermediatefunctionintraocularlensesacasecontrolstudy |