April 2011
Volume 52, Issue 14
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2011
Is The Contrast Sensitivity Function Of Patient Implanted With A Dual Optic Accommodating Iol (synchrony) Similar To Conventional Monofocal Iol (sa 60at)
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Antonio M. Fea
    Ophth/I Clinica Oculistica, Universita di Torino, Torino, Italy
  • Giulia Pignata
    Ophth/I Clinica Oculistica, Universita di Torino, Torino, Italy
  • Lorella Bertaina
    Ophth/I Clinica Oculistica, Universita di Torino, Torino, Italy
  • Beatrice Visentin
    Ophth/I Clinica Oculistica, Universita di Torino, Torino, Italy
  • elena Bartoli
    Ophth/I Clinica Oculistica, Universita di Torino, Torino, Italy
  • Sara Tonetti
    Ophth/I Clinica Oculistica, Universita di Torino, Torino, Italy
  • Rossana Sesia
    Ophth/I Clinica Oculistica, Universita di Torino, Torino, Italy
  • Federico Grignolo
    Ophth/I Clinica Oculistica, Universita di Torino, Torino, Italy
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  Antonio M. Fea, None; Giulia Pignata, None; Lorella Bertaina, None; Beatrice Visentin, None; elena Bartoli, None; Sara Tonetti, None; Rossana Sesia, None; Federico Grignolo, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2011, Vol.52, 5680. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Antonio M. Fea, Giulia Pignata, Lorella Bertaina, Beatrice Visentin, elena Bartoli, Sara Tonetti, Rossana Sesia, Federico Grignolo; Is The Contrast Sensitivity Function Of Patient Implanted With A Dual Optic Accommodating Iol (synchrony) Similar To Conventional Monofocal Iol (sa 60at). Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2011;52(14):5680.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract
 
Purpose:
 

To compare, as a quality of vision index, the monocular photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity with and without glare of patients implanted with the dual optic Synchrony accommodating IOL with the one of patients implanted with conventional monofocal IOL (SA 60 AT).

 
Methods:
 

The contrast sensitivity function of 13 eyes (7 patients) implanted with the Synchrony IOL (Abbot) (age: 77,57 +/-3,9) and of 27 eyes (17 patients ) (mean age: 71,9+/-5.6) implanted with the monofocal SA 60AT (Alcon) were studied under photopic and mesopic conditions with and without glare using the OPTEC 6500P. The people who administered the tests were blind to the type of IOL under examination.

 
Results:
 

The results are reported in the tab. There was no significant difference between the two IOL in any of the conditions tested.

 
Conclusions:
 

the dual optic accommodating IOL provides a similar quality of vision, as expressed by contrast sensitivity, as a standard monofocal IOL.  

 
Keywords: accommodation • contrast sensitivity 
×
×

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.

×