Clinical Results of Diffractive, Refractive, Hybrid Multifocal, and Monofocal Intraocular Lenses

Purpose. To present the outcomes of hybrid multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and to compare with refractive and diffractive multifocal IOLs (MFIOLs). Methods. Three hundred twenty eyes (160 patients) underwent cataract surgery with randomized IOLs bilateral implantation. Changes in...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of ophthalmology Vol. 2018; no. 2018; pp. 1 - 12
Main Authors Aronés-Santivañez, Janny, Morilla, Antonio, Rey, Amanda, Martín-Moral, Daniel, Martínez-Palmer, Ana, Dyrda, Agnieszka, Castilla-Martí, Miguel
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Cairo, Egypt Hindawi Publishing Corporation 01.01.2018
Hindawi
Hindawi Limited
Wiley
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Purpose. To present the outcomes of hybrid multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and to compare with refractive and diffractive multifocal IOLs (MFIOLs). Methods. Three hundred twenty eyes (160 patients) underwent cataract surgery with randomized IOLs bilateral implantation. Changes in uncorrected and distance-corrected logMAR distance, intermediate and near (UNVA and DCNVA) visual acuity (VA), contrast sensitivity (CS), presence of dysphotopsia, spectacle independence, and patient satisfaction were analyzed. Results. Postoperative VA in the hybrid (OptiVis) group was improved in all distances (p<0.001). OptiVis acted superiorly to monofocal IOLs in UNVA and DCNVA (p<0.001 for both) and to refractive ones in DCNVA (p<0.005). Distance, mesopic, without glare CS in OptiVis was lower than in the monofocal group and similar to other MFIOLs. No differences in dysphotopsia pre- and postoperatively and spectacle independence in near for OptiVis and refractive MFIOLs were detected. OptiVis patients were more satisfied than those with monofocal IOLs (p=0.015). Conclusions. After cataract surgery, patients with OptiVis improved VA in all distances. Near and intermediate VA was better than monofocal, and DCNVA was better than the refractive group. CS was lower in OptiVis than in the monofocal group, but there was no difference between MFIOLs. Patient satisfaction was higher in OptiVis than in the monofocal group. This trial is registered with NCT03512626.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
Academic Editor: David P. Piñero
ISSN:2090-004X
2090-0058
DOI:10.1155/2018/8285637