Journal List > J Korean Ophthalmol Soc > v.56(4) > 1010242

TOOLS
Chung, Jung, Lee, Seo, Kim, and Kim: Comparing Clinical Results after Intraocular Lens Implantation Surgery Using Three Other Aspheric Lenses
Original Article

J Korean Ophthalmol Soc 2015;56(4):541-547.

Published online: 7 September 2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7469/JKOS.2015.56.04.541

Comparing Clinical Results after Intraocular Lens Implantation Surgery Using Three Other Aspheric Lenses

Byung Hoon Chung, MD, Ji Won Jung, MD, Hyung Keun Lee, MD, PhD, Kyoung Yul Seo, MD, PhD, Eung Kweon Kim, MD, PhD, Tae Im Kim, MD, PhD

Institute of Vision Research, Department of Ophthalmology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

￭ Address reprint requests to Tae Im Kim, MD, PhD Department of Ophthalmology, Severance Hospital, #50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-752, Korea Tel: 82-2-2228-3570, Fax: 82-2-312-0541 E-mail: TIKIM@yuhs.ac

Received 11 April 20148 October 2014       Accepted 7 March 2015

Copyright © 2015 Korean Ophthalmological Society

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

초록

Purpose:

We compared the clinical results after implantation of the newly-developed aspheric intraocular lens iSert 250 NC60 (Hoya Corporation Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) with 2 other types of widely used intraocular lenses, AcrySof IQ SN60WF (Alcon Laboratories, INC., Fort Worth, TX, USA) and TECNIS 1-piece ZCB00 (AMO Inc., Santa Ana, CA, USA).

Methods:

Seventy cataract eyes were implanted with 1 of 3 aspheric intraocular lenses (Hoya iSert 250 NC60, TECNIS 1-piece ZCB00 or AcrySof IQ SN60WF) by the same surgeon. Uncorrected vision, best corrected vision, spherical equivalent, higher order aberrations, and modulation transfer function were measured 1 and 3 months after the cataract surgery.

Results:

Uncorrected vision and best corrected vision were not significantly different among the 3 groups; however, eyes implanted with iSert250 NC60 showed more hyperopic-shifted postoperative spherical equivalents than expected compared to the other 2 groups. Total ocular aberrations and internal optics aberrations were similar among the 3 groups while the root mean square of the corneal aberrations showed differences. Eyes implanted with iSert 250 NC60 showed superior results in modulation transfer function compared with the other 2 groups in a majority of spatial frequencies 3 months postoperatively.

Conclusions:

The newly developed aspheric intraocular lens iSert 250 NC60 showed clinically equal results compared with 2 other verified intraocular lenses AcrySof IQ SN60WF and TECNIS 1-piece ZCB00 in vision, higher-order aberrations, and modulation transfer functions.

Keywords: Aberration, Cataract, Intraocular lens, Modulation transfer function, Preloaded

References

1. Brint SF, Ostrick DM, Bryan JE. Keratometric cylinder and visual performance following phacoemulsification and implantation with silicone small-incision or poly(methyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1991; 17:32–6.
crossref
2. Levy JH, Pisacano AM, Chadwick K. Astigmatic changes after cataract surgery with 5.1 mm and 3.5 mm sutureless incisions. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1994; 20:630–3.
crossref
3. Menapace R, Radax U, Amon M, Papapanos P. No-stitch, small incision cataract surgery with flexible intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1994; 20:534–42.
crossref
4. Olson RJ, Mamalis N, Werner L, Apple DJ. Cataract treatment in the beginning of the 21st century. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003; 136:146–54.
crossref
5. Nochez Y, Favard A, Majzoub S, Pisella PJ. Measurement of corneal aberrations for customisation of intraocular lens asphericity: impact on quality of vision after microincision cataract surgery. Br J Ophthalmol. 2010; 94:440–4.
crossref
6. Montés-Micó R, Ferrer-Blasco T, Cerviño A. Analysis of the possible benefits of aspheric intraocular lenses: review of the literature. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009; 35:172–81.
crossref
7. Schuster AK, Tesarz J, Vossmerbaeumer U. The impact on vision of aspheric to spherical monofocal intraocular lenses in cataract surgery: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 2013; 120:2166–75.
8. Masket S, Wang L, Belani S. Induced astigmatism with 2.2- and 3.0-mm coaxial phacoemulsification incisions. J Refract Surg. 2009; 25:21–4.
crossref
9. Kohnen T, Dick B, Jacobi KW. Comparison of the induced astigmatism after temporal clear corneal tunnel incisions of different sizes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1995; 21:417–24.
crossref
10. Hayashi K, Yoshida M, Hayashi H. Postoperative corneal shape changes: microincision versus small-incision coaxial cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009; 35:233–9.
crossref
11. Elkady B, Piñero D, Alió JL. Corneal incision quality: microincision cataract surgery versus microcoaxial phacoemulsification. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009; 35:466–74.
crossref
12. Pham Lagler CN, Munir WM, Rowe SG. Intraocular lens insertion speed and structural changes in lens and cartridge system. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2013; 39:660.
13. Bausz M, Fodor E, Resch MD, Kristóf K. Bacterial contamination in the anterior chamber after povidone-iodine application and the effect of the lens implantation device. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006; 32:1691–5.
crossref
14. Weindler J, Spang S, Jung WK, Ruprecht KW. Bacterial anterior chamber contamination with foldable silicone lens implantation using a forceps and an injector. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1996; 22(Suppl 2):1263–6.
crossref
15. Choi YJ, Han KE, Ahn JM, et al. Comparisons of clinical results after implantation of three aspheric intraocular lenses. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2013; 54:251–6.
crossref
16. Shimizu K, Kobayashi K, Takayama S, Zhaobin G. Preloaded injector for intraocular lens implantation without the use of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008; 34:1157–60.
crossref
17. Kim YJ, Cheon MH, Ko DA, et al. Clinical outcome of in-the-bag single-piece aspheric intraocular lens implantation after microincision cataract surgery. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2013; 54:595–601.
crossref
18. McKelvie J, McArdle B, McGhee C. The influence of tilt, decentration, and pupil size on the higher-order aberration profile of aspheric intraocular lenses. Ophthalmology. 2011; 118:1724–31.
crossref
19. Matsuura K, Inoue Y. Ophthalmic viscosurgical device backflow into cartridge during intraocular lens insertion using injectors. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014; 8:321–5.
crossref

Figure 1.
Modulation transfer function (MTF) of 3 groups at 5-mm pupil zone. (A) MTF of total eye. * p-value = statistical difference between 3 intraocular lens groups. (B) MTF of internal optics.
jkos-56-541f1.tif
Table 1.
Patient demographics
　 iSert 250 NC60(n = 26) TECNIS ZCB00(n = 23) AcrySof SN60WF (n = 21) p-value
Mean age (years) 64.77 ± 8.9 64.04 ± 8.4 66.67 ± 10.3 0.516
Sex (M/F) 14/12 11/12 8/13 0.514
Right/left of eyes 11/15 11/12 11/10 0.723
Axial length (mm) 23.48 ± 0.46 23.37 ± 0.44 23.74 ± 1.31 0.698

Values are presented as mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated.

Table 2.
Visual acuity and spherical equivalent at postoperative 1 month
  iSert 250 NC60(n = 26) TECNIS ZCB00(n = 23) AcrySof SN60WF (n = 21) p-value
UCVA (log MAR) 0.20 ± 0.20 0.22 ± 0.18 0.19 ± 0.24 0.810
BCVA (log MAR) 0.12 ± 0.20 0.06 ± 0.21 0.07 ± 0.14 0.347
SE -0.30 ± 0.41 -0.42 ± 0.57 -0.39 ± 0.69 0.366
Δ (goal diopter-achieved SE)* 0.20 ± 0.29 -0.21 ± 0.48† -0.10 ± 0.27† 0.001

Values are presented as mean ± SD.

UCVA = uncorrected visual acuity; BCVA = best corrected visual acuity; SE = spherical equivalent.

* Calculated as (spherical equivalent at postoperative 3 months – goal diopter);

† Statistically significant difference with iSert 250 NC60.

Table 3.
Visual acuity and spherical equivalent at postoperative 3 months
　 iSert 250 NC60(n = 26) TECNIS ZCB00(n = 23) AcrySof SN60WF (n = 21) p-value
UCVA (log MAR) 0.18 ± 0.22 0.21 ± 0.22 0.19 ± 0.24 0.778
BCVA (log MAR) 0.09 ± 0.17 0.06 ± 0.13 0.06 ± 0.12 0.821
SE -0.37 ± 0.48 -0.42 ± 0.46 -0.38 ± 0.70 0.559
Δ (goal diopter-achieved SE)* 0.13 ± 0.37 -0.21 ± 0.37† -0.09 ± 0.27† 0.006

Values are presented as mean ± SD.

UCVA = uncorrected visual acuity; BCVA = best corrected visual acuity; SE = spherical equivalent.

* Calculated as (spherical equivalent at postoperative 3 months – goal diopter;

† Statistically significant difference with iSert 250 NC60.

Table 4.
Total ocular aberrations (μ m) of the 3 groups measured by iTrace®
　 iSert 250 NC60(n = 26) TECNIS ZCB00(n = 23) AcrySof SN60WF (n = 21) p-value
RMS total 1.95 ± 2.43 1.89 ± 2.56 1.23 ± 0.82 0.464
RMS HOA total 1.62 ± 2.09 1.41 ± 2.21 0.77 ± 0.56 0.276
-3) Trefoil 6 (Z3 -0.21 ± 0.79 -0.20 ± 0.47 0.12 ± 0.50 0.135
-1) Coma 7 (Z3 -0.07 ± 1.12 0.43 ± 1.11 0.11 ± 0.28 0.186
1) Coma 8 (Z3 0.07 ± 0.46 -0.18 ± 0.85 0.01 ± 0.24 0.288
3) Trefoil 9 (Z3 -0.22 ± 0.99 0.30 ± 0.94 0.02 ± 0.22 0.092
0) SA (Z4 -0.07 ± 0.59 -0.33 ± 0.76 0.01 ± 0.14 0.121

Values are presented as mean ± SD.

RMS = root mean square; HOA = higher order aberration; SA = spherical aberration.

Table 5.
Internal optics aberrations (μ m) of the 3 groups measured by iTrace®
　 iSert 250 NC60(n = 26) TECNIS ZCB00(n = 23) AcrySof SN60WF (n = 21) p-value
RMS total 1.93 ± 2.45 1.81 ± 2.57 1.20 ± 0.69 0.479
RMS HOA total 1.63 ± 2.09 1.41 ± 2.23 0.91 ± 0.58 0.404
-3) Trefoil 6 (Z3 -0.19 ± 0.79 -0.17 ± 0.46 0.18 ± 0.55 0.093
-1) Coma 7 (Z3 -0.06 ± 1.09 0.44 ± 1.09 0.22 ± 0.35 0.175
1) Coma 8 (Z3 0.06 ± 0.49 -0.14 ± 0.86 0.01 ± 0.29 0.498
3) Trefoil 9 (Z3 -0.29 ± 0.98 0.22 ± 0.91 -0.14 ± 0.22 0.075
0) SA (Z4 -0.18 ± 0.60 -0.44 ± 0.82 -0.14 ± 0.15 0.178

Values are presented as mean ± SD.

RMS = root mean square; HOA = higher order aberration; SA = spherical aberration.

Table 6.
Corneal aberrations (μ m) of the 3 groups measured by iTrace®
　 iSert 250 NC60(n = 26) TECNIS ZCB00(n = 23) AcrySof SN60WF (n = 21) p-value
RMS total 0.40 ± 0.20 0.60 ± 0.36* 0.74 ± 0.38* 0.002
RMS HOA total 0.27 ± 0.18 0.32 ± 0.25 0.40 ± 0.13 0.081
Trefoil 6 (Z3-3) -0.02 ± 0.11 -0.04 ± 0.13 -0.06 ± 0.17 0.564
Coma 7 (Z3-1) 0.03 ± 0.12 -0.01 ± 0.22 -0.04 ± 0.15 0.293
Coma 8 (Z31) 0.01 ± 0.13 -0.04 ± 0.13 0.00 ± 0.14 0.282
Trefoil 9 (Z33) 0.06 ± 0.13 0.08 ± 0.14 0.13 ± 0.16 0.245
SA (Z40) 0.11 ± 0.10 0.15 ± 0.14 0.15 ± 0.06 0.350

Values are presented as mean ± SD.

RMS = root mean square; HOA = higher order aberration; SA = spherical aberration.

* Statistically significant difference with iSert 250 NC60.

TOOLS
Similar articles