Visual Results Following Implantation of a Refractive Multifocal Intraocular Lens in One Eye and a Diffractive in the Contralateral Eye

To assess the visual outcomes in patients who underwent cataract surgery with multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation using a "mix and match" approach. Twenty patients (40 eyes) were involved in this prospective, nonrandomized study. Refractive multifocal IOLs (ReZoom NXG1) were imp...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Turk oftalmoloji gazetesi 2018-02, Vol.48 (1), p.6-14
Hauptverfasser: Yıldırım Karabağ, Revan, Günenç, Üzeyir, Aydın, Rukiye, Arıkan, Gül, Aslankara, Hüseyin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To assess the visual outcomes in patients who underwent cataract surgery with multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation using a "mix and match" approach. Twenty patients (40 eyes) were involved in this prospective, nonrandomized study. Refractive multifocal IOLs (ReZoom NXG1) were implanted in patients' dominant eyes and diffractive multifocal IOLs (Tecnis ZMA00) were implanted in their non-dominant eyes. Monocular and binocular uncorrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuity (logMAR), and contrast sensitivity levels were measured at 1, 3, and 6 months after cataract surgery. Defocus curves, reading speeds, patient satisfaction, spectacle dependence, and halo and glare symptoms were also evaluated at 6 months after the surgery. Postoperative quality of life was assessed with the Turkish version of National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25. The study group comprised 8 females and 12 males with a mean age of 69.45±10.76 years (range, 31-86 years). The uncorrected distance and intermediate visual acuity levels were significantly better in the ReZoom-implanted eyes at postoperative 6 months (p=0.026 and p=0.037, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in uncorrected near visual acuity (p>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in contrast sensitivity, reading speed, halos, or glare between the groups (p
ISSN:2149-8695
1300-0659
2147-2661
2149-8709
DOI:10.4274/tjo.56588