Search

Purpose: To assess spectacle independence and patient satisfaction with pseudophakic mini-monovision in patients undergoing routine bilateral cataract surgery with implantation of an aspherical aberration-free intraocular lens (Akreos AO, Bausch and Lomb, USA). Methods: This study was a retrospective analysis that included 60 eyes of 30 consecutive patients between 2016 and 2018. The included patients had undergone sequential bilateral routine phacoemulsification after choosing the mini-monovision option. Test for ocular dominance was done using a sighting test. Emmetropia was aimed at in the dominant eye, while in the non-dominant eye the aim was myopia between −1 D and −1.5 D. The main outcome parameters were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), and data reported from a questionnaire given to the patients at 3 months postoperative visit. Results: The study included 60 eyes of 30 consecutive patients. The mean binocular UDVA was 0.09 ± 0.07 logMAR. Twenty-eight patients (93%) had binocular UDVA of 0.2 logMAR or better. The mean binocular uncorrected intermediate distance visual acuity (at 65 cm) was 0.16 ± 0.12 logMAR. Twenty-six patients (87%) had binocular uncorrected intermediate distance visual acuity of 0.2 logMAR or better. The mean binocular UNVA (at 35 cm) was 0.30 ± 0.21 logMAR. Fourteen patients (47%) had binocular UNVA of 0.2 logMAR or better. The patients score in the questionnaire was significantly higher in far and intermediate vision than near vision (p = 0.022). The patients score was significantly higher in day vision than night vision (p = 0.031). The mean overall patient satisfaction was good (9.1 ± 1.54). Twenty-eight patients (93%) reported high spectacle independence for far vision (score 8, 9, or 10). Conclusion: Pseudophakic mini-monovision shows good results for spectacle independence and high patient satisfaction. It is a safe and inexpensive option after bilateral cataract surgery for correcting distance and intermediate vision. However, it might show lower results with near and night vision which is generally acceptable. Using aberration-free monofocal IOL allows for the residual normal positive corneal aberration that may augment the effect of monovision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Akreos AO and Kontur AB are two commonly used intraocular lenses (IOLs) in Iran. This study was designed to evaluate the visual performance of these lenses. Methods: In a comparative interventional study, 35 patients (70 eyes) were recruited, and each IOL was implanted in one eye of the patients, randomly. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), contrast sensitivity, aberrometric analysis, and depth of focus were evaluated 1 month and 3 months postoperatively. A visual quality questionnaire was also filled for each eye, and the results were compared. Results: Mean age of the patients was 60.97 ± 7.00 years. BCVA was not significantly different between the two eyes, before, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively (p > 0.05 for all). Photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity was not different between the two lenses instead of photopic 18 cycles per degree, 3 months postoperatively and in mesopic 6 cycles per degree 1 month postoperatively (p = 0.034 and p = 0.002, respectively). Aberrometric factors including HoRMS, Total RMS, and Higher order without Z(4,0) were not significantly different between the two lenses (p > 0.05 for all), but they were slightly lower for Akreos AO. Post-operative distance-corrected visual acuity for intermediate and near vision were not different between the two groups (p > 0.05, respectively). Conclusion: Visual performance of Akreos AO and Kontur AB is similar. However, contrast sensitivity and aberrometric parameters are slightly better for Akreos AO IOL.

Purpose: To compare spherical aberration and contrast sensitivity function following implantation of four different foldable posterior chamber intraocular lenses (IOLs), namely Sensar, Akreos AO, Tecnis, and AcrySof IQ. Methods: In this randomized clinical trial, 68 eyes of 68 patients with senile cataracts underwent phacoemulsification and IOL implantation with Sensar (n=17), Akreos AO (n=17), Tecnis (n=17), or AcrySof IQ (n=17). Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) and best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), spherical aberration and contrast sensitivity function (CSF) were compared among the study groups, 3 months after surgery. Results: There was no significant difference between the study groups in terms of age (P = 0.21). Mean postoperative BSCVA with Sensar, Akreos AO, Tecnis, and AcrySof IQ was 0.15±0.10, 0.12±0.9, 0.08±0.08, and 0.08±0.07 logMAR, respectively (P=0.08). Spherical aberration measured over a 4 mm pupil was significantly higher with Sensar and Akreos AO than the two other IOLs. The difference between Tecnis and AcrySof IQ was significantly in favor of the former IOL. Over a 6 mm pupil, spherical aberrations were comparable with Sensar and Akreos AO, furthermore spherical aberration was also comparable among eyes implanted with Akreos AO, AcrySof IQ, and Tecnis. Sensar yielded significantly inferior results as compared to Acrysof IQ and Tecnis. CSF with Sensar was inferior to the three aspheric IOLs at the majority of spatial frequencies. Tecnis yielded significantly better mesopic CSF at 1.5 and 3 cycles per degree spatial frequencies. Conclusion: Tecnis and AcrySof IQ provided significantly better visual function as compared to Sensar and Akreos AO, especially with smaller pupil size. However, this difference diminished with increasing pupil size.

Purpose: To compare spherical aberration and contrast sensitivity function following implantation of four different foldable posterior chamber intraocular lenses (IOLs), namely Sensar, Akreos AO, Tecnis, and AcrySof IQ. Methods: In this randomized clinical trial, 68 eyes of 68 patients with senile cataracts underwent phacoemulsification and IOL implantation with Sensar (n=17), Akreos AO (n=17), Tecnis (n=17), or AcrySof IQ (n=17). Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) and best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA), spherical aberration and contrast sensitivity function (CSF) were compared among the study groups, 3 months after surgery. Results: There was no significant difference between the study groups in terms of age (P = 0.21). Mean postoperative BSCVA with Sensar, Akreos AO, Tecnis, and AcrySof IQ was 0.15±0.10, 0.12±0.9, 0.08±0.08, and 0.08±0.07 logMAR, respectively (P=0.08). Spherical aberration measured over a 4 mm pupil was significantly higher with Sensar and Akreos AO than the two other IOLs. The difference between Tecnis and AcrySof IQ was significantly in favor of the former IOL. Over a 6 mm pupil, spherical aberrations were comparable with Sensar and Akreos AO, furthermore spherical aberration was also comparable among eyes implanted with Akreos AO, AcrySof IQ, and Tecnis. Sensar yielded significantly inferior results as compared to Acrysof IQ and Tecnis. CSF with Sensar was inferior to the three aspheric IOLs at the majority of spatial frequencies. Tecnis yielded significantly better mesopic CSF at 1.5 and 3 cycles per degree spatial frequencies. Conclusion: Tecnis and AcrySof IQ provided significantly better visual function as compared to Sensar and Akreos AO, especially with smaller pupil size. However, this difference diminished with increasing pupil size. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Akreos AO and Kontur AB are two commonly used intraocular lenses (IOLs) in Iran. This study was designed to evaluate the visual performance of these lenses., Methods: In a comparative interventional study, 35 patients (70 eyes) were recruited, and each IOL was implanted in one eye of the patients, randomly. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), contrast sensitivity, aberrometric analysis, and depth of focus were evaluated 1 month and 3 months postoperatively. A visual quality questionnaire was also filled for each eye, and the results were compared., Results: Mean age of the patients was 60.97 ± 7.00 years. BCVA was not significantly different between the two eyes, before, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively (p > 0.05 for all). Photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity was not different between the two lenses instead of photopic 18 cycles per degree, 3 months postoperatively and in mesopic 6 cycles per degree 1 month postoperatively (p = 0.034 and p = 0.002, respectively). Aberrometric factors including HoRMS, Total RMS, and Higher order without Z(4,0) were not significantly different between the two lenses (p > 0.05 for all), but they were slightly lower for Akreos AO. Post-operative distance-corrected visual acuity for intermediate and near vision were not different between the two groups (p > 0.05, respectively)., Conclusion: Visual performance of Akreos AO and Kontur AB is similar. However, contrast sensitivity and aberrometric parameters are slightly better for Akreos AO IOL.