Journal List > J Korean Ophthalmol Soc > v.49(8) > 1008041

Lee, Park, and Kim: Clinical Results and Some Problems of Multifocal Apodized Diffractive Intraocular Lens Implantation

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate near and far visual outcomes, subjective visual symptoms, and patient satisfaction with AcrySof® ReSTOR® diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOL), and to study the reasons for postoperative dissatisfaction.

Methods

Twenty-three eyes of 19 patients received phacoemulsifications and implantation of AcrySof® ReSTOR® IOL. The main outcome measures, taken at postoperative 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months, were uncorrected and corrected near and distant visual acuity, refractory errors, subjective visual symptoms (glare, halo, and night vision), and satisfaction.

Results

At the 3-month postoperative visit, the mean uncorrected near and distant visual acuities were 0.59±0.24 (0.25±0.22 LogMAR unit) and 0.78±0.27 (0.13±0.10 LogMAR unit), respectively. In addition, patients’ satisfaction with uncorrected near vision, intermediate vision, far vision, and general visual performance were better than their satisfaction with night vision. Glare and halos were reported as severe by only 10.2% and 5.3% of patients, respectively.
The seven eyes with poor patient satisfaction included eyes with a high incidence of preoperative ocular diseases or preoperative and postoperative high corneal astigmatisms of more than 1.0 diopter.

Conclusions

The AcrySof® ReSTOR® IOL demonstrated good near and distant visual acuity with good patient satisfaction. Previous ocular disease, corneal astigmatism less than 1.0 diopter, and patient lifestyle should be considered to enhance patient satisfaction.

References

1. Kohnen T, Allen D, Boureau C. . European multicenter study of the AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive intraocular lens. Ophthalmology. 2006; 113:578–84.
crossref
2. Toto L, Falconio G, Vecchiarino L. . Visual performance and biocompatibility of 2 multifocal diffractive IOLs:six-month comparative study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007; 33:1419–25.
3. Alfonso JF, Fernández-Vega L, Baamonde MB, Montés-Micó R. Prospective visual evaluation of apodized diffractive intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007; 33:1235–43.
crossref
4. Blaylock JF, Si Z, Vickers C. Visual and refractive status at different focal distances after implantation of the ReSTOR multifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006; 32:1464–73.
crossref
5. Vander schueren I, Zeyen T, D'heer B. Multifocal IOL implantation: 16 cases. Br J Ophthalmol. 1991; 75:88–91.
6. Sen HN, Sarikkola AU, Uusitalo RJ, Laatikainen L. Quality of vision after AMO Array multifocal intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004; 30:2483–93.
crossref
7. Davison JA, Simpson MJ. History and development of the apodized diffractive intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006; 32:849–58.
crossref
8. Slagsvold JE. 3M diffractive multifocal intraocular lens: eight year follow-up. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000; 26:402–7.
crossref
9. Vingolo EM, Grenga P, Iacobelli L, Grenga R. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity: AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive versus AcrySof SA60AT monofocal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007; 33:1244–7.
crossref
10. Tochel CM, Morton JS, Jay JL, Morrison JD. Relationship between visual field loss and contrast threshold elevation in glaucoma. BMC Ophthalmol. 2005; 13:22–8.
crossref
11. Gardiner AM, Armstrong RA, Dunne MC, Murray PI. Correlation between visual function and visual ability in patients with uveitis. Br J Ophthalmol. 2002; 86:993–6.
crossref
12. Ellemberg D, Lewis TL, Maurer D. . Spatial and temporal vision in patients treated for bilateral congenital cataracts. Vision Res. 1999; 39:3480–9.
crossref
13. Hayashi K, Hayashi H, Nakao F, Hayashi F. Influence of astigmatism on multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000; 130:477–82.
crossref
14. Chiam PJ, Chan JH, Aggarwal RK, Kasaby S. ReSTOR intraocular lens implantation in cataract surgery: quality of vision. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006; 32:1459–63.
crossref
15. Randazzo A, Nizzola F, Rossetti L. . Pharmacological management of night vision disturbances after refractive surgery Results of a randomized clinical trial. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005; 31:1764–72.

Figure 1.
The AcrySof apodized diffractive intraocular lens contains a diffractive structure in the central 3.6 mm on the anterior surface of the optics.
jkos-49-1235f1.tif
Figure 2.
Patient’s satisfaction reports at 3 months after the operation.
jkos-49-1235f2.tif
Table 1.
Patient characteristics
No. of eyes (patients) 23(19)
Mean Age (years) 56.2±3.66
Gender (male/female) 10/9
Mean IOL power (diopter) 19.61±2.31
Predicted postoperative refraction (diopter) 0.14±0.21
Axial length (mm) 23.85±0.87
Previous ocular disease
POAG (eyes) 4/23(17.4%)
Uveitis (eyes) 1/23(4.3%)
Congenital Cataract (eyes) 2/23(8.7%)
Table 2.
Snellen visual acuity (LogMAR unit) at 3 months after the operation
Distant Mean±SD 20/40 or Better 20/25 or Better
Uncorrected 0.78±0.27 (0.13±0.10 LogMAR unit) 20/23 (87.0%) 16/23 (69.9%)
Best correscted 0.91±0.21 (0.06±0.13 LogMAR unit) 22/23 (95.7%) 19/23 (82.6%)
Near Mean±SD J4 or Better J2 or Better
Uncorrected 0.59±0.24 (0.25±0.22 LogMAR unit) 16/23 (69.9%) 5/23 (21.7%)
Best corrected 0.73±0.16 (0.15±0.09 LogMAR unit) 22/23(95.7%) 14/23 (60.9%)

LogMAR=logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution; J=Jaeger chart.

Table 3.
Comparison between satisfied and unsatisfied patient group at 3 months after the operation
Satisfied group Unsatisfied group p-value *
Previous ocular disease (eyes) 1/16 (6.3%) 6/7 (82.7%) 0.000
Preoperative astigmatism (diopters) 0.77±0.74 2.18±1.32 0.000
Postoperative astigmatism after 3 months (diopters) 0.37±0.54 1.11±0.63 0.008
Patient’s age (years) 58.45±10.68 49.37±9.56 0.116
Preoperative add power (diopters) 2.35±0.67 2.47±0.53 0.751

* Paired t-test.

Table 4.
Preoperative patient exclusoin criteria recommended by Alcon Lab
Subjective Hypercritical patients
exclusion Patients with unrealistic expectations
Those who want to wear glasses
Occupational night drivers
Night vision issues
High Computer Use (intermediate distance)
Medical >1.0 D of corneal astigmatism
exclusion Pre-existing ocular pathology
Previous refractive patients
Table 5.
Comparison between inclusion and exclusion patient group at 3 months after the operation
Inclusion group Exclusion group p-value*
Uncorrected distant visual acuity 0.87±0.12 0.65±0.22 0.041
(Mean±SD) (0.07±0.15 LogMAR unit) (0.15±0.17 LogMAR unit)
Uncorrected near visual acuity 0.68±0.14 0.41±0.17 0.032
(Mean±SD) (0.14±0.17 LogMAR unit) (0.34±0.14 LogMAR unit)
Spherical equivalent (mean±SD) 0.22±0.75 0.54±0.47 0.016
Patient satisfaction (score) 4.25±0.23 2.9±0.74 0.006

* Paired t-test.

TOOLS
Similar articles