Objective: To compare the clinical outcomes and visual quality of subjects undergoing cataract surgery with the implantation of two different models of diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses (IOL). Material and Methods: This was a prospective, parallel-group, randomized, comparative, single-masked clinical study. A total of 30 subjects, who were scheduled to undergo bilateral cataract surgery were randomly assigned to two groups: RayOne and PanOptix IOL. The outcome measures were corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity (CDVA, UDVA) at 4 m, uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) at 80 and 60 cm, distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA) at 60 and 80 cm, distance-corrected and uncorrected near visual acuity at 40 cm, and patients' satisfaction. Results: Each group comprised 30 eyes of 15 subjects. No statistically significant differences were determined between the groups in terms of CDVA, UDVA, distance-corrected near visual acuity, and uncorrected near visual acuity. The monocular UIVA values at 80 cm were 0.09±0.09 logMAR in the RayOne IOL group and 0.19±0.11 logMAR in the PanOptix IOL group (p=0.01). The UIVA values at 60 cm were better in the PanOptix IOL group (p=0.049,p=0.01, respectively), and the DCIVA at 80 cm were better in the RayOne IOL group (p=0.01,0.047, respectively). The RayOne IOL group had more bothersome halos and starbursts (p=0.026,p=0.01, respectively). Conclusion: Both IOLs provided a very good restoration of visual acuity. However, with the PanOptix IOL, the likelihood of subjects experiencing bothersome halos and starbursts was less. The RayOne IOL might be a better choice for subjects that require further intermediate vision.
Keywords: Patient satisfaction; multifocal intraocular lenses; cataract; glare; visual acuity
Amaç: İki farklı difraktif trifokal göz içi lens (GİL) implantasyonu ile katarakt ameliyatı olan olguların klinik sonuçları ve görme kalitesinin karşılaştırmak. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Bu prospektif, parallel gruplu, randomize, karşılaştırmalı ve tek maskeli bir klinik çalışmaydı. Bilateral katarakt ameliyatı planlanan toplam 30 olgu, RayOne ve PanOptix GİL olmak üzere rastgele iki gruba ayrıldı. Sonuçlar 4 m'den düzeltilmiş ve düzeltilmemiş uzak görme keskinliği [corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity (CDVA, UDVA)], 80 ve 60 cm'den düzeltilmemiş ara görme keskinliği [uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA)], 60 ve 80 cm'den düzeltilmiş ara görme keskinliği [distancecorrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA)], 40 cm'den düzeltilmiş ve düzeltilmemiş yakın görme keskinliği ve hasta memnuniyeti karşılaştırıldı. Bulgular: Gruplara 15 olgunun 30 gözü alındı. CDVA, UDVA, düzeltilmiş yakın görme keskinliği ve düzeltilmemiş yakın görme keskinliği açısından gruplar arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark saptanmadı. Seksen cm'deki monoküler UIVA değerleri RayOne GİL grubunda 0,09±0,09 logMAR ve PanOptix GİL grubunda 0,19±0,11 logMAR idi (p=0,01). Altmış cm'deki UIVA değerleri PanOptix GİL grubunda daha iyiydi (sırasıyla p=0,049 ve p=0,01), 80 cm'deki DCIVA değerleri RayOne GİL grubunda daha iyiydi (sırasıyla p=0,01. p=0,047). RayOne GİL grubunda haleler ve yıldız patlamalarına daha fazla rastlandı (sırasıyla p=0,026. p=0,01). Sonuç: Her iki GİL de çok iyi görme keskinliği restorasyonu sağladı. Bununla birlikte, PanOptix IOL implante edilen olgularda haleler ve yıldız patlamaları daha az görüldü. RayOne GİL, ara mesafe görüşüne daha fazla ihtiyaç duyan olgular için daha iyi bir seçim olabileceğini düşünmekteyiz.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Hasta memnuniyeti; multifokal göz içi lensler; katarakt; parıltı; görme keskinliği
- Sezgin Asena B. Visual and refractive outcomes, spectacle independence, and visual disturbances after cataract or refractive lens exchange surgery: comparison of 2 trifocal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2019;45(11):1539-46. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Fernández J, Rodríguez-Vallejo M, Martínez J, Tauste A, Pi-ero DP. Standard clinical outcomes with a new low addition trifocal intraocular lens. J Refract Surg. 2019;35(4):214-21. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Javaloy J, Rivera E, Montalbán R, Beltrán J, Mu-oz G, Rohrweck S. Diffractive trifocal pseudophakic intraocular lenses in high myopic eyes: 2-year assessment after implantation. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019;257(6):1331-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Fernández J, Rodríguez-Vallejo M, Martínez J, Tauste A, Pi-ero DP. Patient selection to optimize near vision performance with a low-addition trifocal lens. J Optom. 2020;13(1):50-8. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Poyales F, Garzon N. Comparison of 3-month visual outcomes of a spherical and a toric trifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2019;45:135-45. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Piovella M, Colonval S, Kapp A, Reiter J, Van Cauwenberge F, Alfonso J. Patient outcomes following implantation with a trifocal toric IOL: twelve-month prospective multicentre study. Eye (Lond). 2019;33(1):144-53. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Böhm M, Hemkeppler E, Herzog M, Schönbrunn S, de'Lorenzo N, Petermann K, et al. Comparison of a panfocal and trifocal diffractive intraocular lens after femtosecond laser-assisted lens surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2018;44(12):1454-62. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kohnen T, Titke C, Böhm M. Trifocal intraocular lens implantation to treat visual demands in various distances following lens removal. Am J Ophthalmol. 2016;161:71-7.e1. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kohnen T, Herzog M, Hemkeppler E, Schönbrunn S, De Lorenzo N, Petermann K, et al. Visual performance of a quadrifocal (trifocal) intraocular lens following removal of the crystalline lens. Am J Ophthalmol. 2017;184:52-62. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Gil-Cazorla R, Shah S, Naroo SA. A review of the surgical options for the correction of presbyopia. Br J Ophthalmol. 2016;100(1):62-70. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Chang DH. Visual acuity and patient satisfaction at varied distances and lighting conditions after implantation of an aspheric diffractive multifocal one-piece intraocular lens. Clin Ophthalmol. 2016;10:1471-7. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Yiğit U, Çavuşoğlu E, Onur İU, Kaya FS. Clinical outcomes following implantation of a new aspheric monofocal intraocular lens. JAREM 2019;9(Supplement 1): S35-40. [Crossref]
- Ferreira TB, Ribeiro FJ. Prospective comparison of clinical performance and subjective outcomes between two diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses in bilateral cataract surgery. J Refract Surg. 2019;35(7):418-25. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Ribeiro F, Ferreira TB. Comparison of clinical outcomes of 3 trifocal IOLs. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2020;46(9):1247-52. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Carson D, Xu Z, Alexander E, Choi M, Zhao Z, Hong X. Optical bench performance of 3 trifocal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016;42(9):1361-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Marques EF, Ferreira TB. Comparison of visual outcomes of 2 diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015;41(2):354-63. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Imburgia A, Gaudenzi F, Mularoni K, Mussoni G, Mularoni A. Comparison of clinical performance and subjective outcomes between two diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and one monofocal IOL in bilateral cataract surgery. Front Biosci (Landmark Ed). 2022;27(2):41. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Vryghem JC, Heireman S. Visual performance after the implantation of a new trifocal intraocular lens. Clin Ophthalmol. 2013;7:1957-65. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Law EM, Aggarwal RK, Kasaby H. Clinical outcomes with a new trifocal intraocular lens. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2014;24(4):501-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Kaymak H, Fahle M, Ott G, Mester U. Intraindividual comparison of the effect of training on visual performance with ReSTOR and Tecnis diffractive multifocal IOLs. J Refract Surg. 2008;24(3):287-93. [Crossref] [PubMed]
.: Process List