March 2012
Volume 53, Issue 14
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   March 2012
Binocular Visual Outcome Of Combining A Segmented Multifocal With An‘Accommodating’ Intraocular Lens
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Emma J. Berrow
    Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Midland Eye Institute, Lode Lane, Solihull, West Midlands, United Kingdom
  • Sunil Shah
    Midland Eye Institute, Lode Lane, Solihull, West Midlands, United Kingdom
    Birmingham and Midland Eye Centre, Dudley Road, Birmingham, West Midlands, United Kingdom
  • James S. Wolffsohn
    Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom
  • Amy L. Sheppard
    Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom
  • Uday Bhatt
    Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom
  • Gurpreet Bhogal
    Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom
  • Phillip Buckhurst
    Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  Emma J. Berrow, None; Sunil Shah, None; James S. Wolffsohn, None; Amy L. Sheppard, None; Uday Bhatt, None; Gurpreet Bhogal, None; Phillip Buckhurst, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science March 2012, Vol.53, 1367. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Emma J. Berrow, Sunil Shah, James S. Wolffsohn, Amy L. Sheppard, Uday Bhatt, Gurpreet Bhogal, Phillip Buckhurst; Binocular Visual Outcome Of Combining A Segmented Multifocal With An‘Accommodating’ Intraocular Lens. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2012;53(14):1367.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To evaluate visual function after implantation with a zonal refractive aspheric multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) (Lentis M Plus,) in one eye and an accommodative IOL (Tetraflex KH-3500, Lenstec inc) in the other eye.

Methods: : Eighteen patients were implanted with the Tetraflex accommodating IOL in one eye and the Lentis M Plus in the other eye were followed up 3 month post-operatively. Data collected at the post-operative visit included uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UCDVA and CDVA); subjective refraction; defocus curve testing from +1.5D to -4.0D in randomised 0.5D steps using photopic and mesopic conditions; contrast sensitivity (CSV-1000); and the near activity visual questionnaire (NAVQ) to gauge patient satisfaction with near vision.

Results: : The cohort consisted of 12 females and 6 males with a mean age of 62 ± 15 (range 44-85 years). UDVA was similar with the multifocal and accommodating IOLs (p=0.71); 0.10logMAR (SD ± 0.08, range 0.00-0.40) in the Tetraflex implanted eyes and 0.12logMAR (SD ± 0.10, range 0.00-0.30) in the Lentis M Plus implanted eyes. CDVA was also similar (p=0.65) with the multifocal and accommodating IOL; 0.04logMAR (SD ± 0.05, range 0.00-0.01) in the Tetraflex implanted eyes and 0.03logMAR (SD ± 0.05, range 0.00-0.10). Mean spherical equivalent (MSE) was -0.36D (SD ± 0.54, range -1.13 to +0.33) for eyes implanted with the Tetraflex, and -0.16D (SD ± 0.38, range -0.63 to +0.38) for eyes implanted with Lentis M Plus, with no statistical difference between the IOLs (p = 0.38).

Conclusions: : Both Lentis M Plus and Tetraflex lenses perform well at distance. Combining lenses may provide a good solution to enhance near vision while maintaining good distance vision with spectacle independence.

Keywords: refractive surgery: other technologies • refractive surgery • accommodation 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×