May 2007
Volume 48, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2007
Subjective Perception of Light Scatter in Patients Treated With Monofocal and Multifocal Intraocular Lens Implants
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • A. Cervino
    Optometry, School of Life and Health Sciences. Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Applied Physics (Optics), Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
  • S. L. Hosking
    Optometry and Visual Science, City University, London, United Kingdom
  • R. Montes-Mico
    Optics, Universidad de Valencia, Valencia, Spain
  • J. L. Alio
    Ophthalmology, Universidad Miguel Hernandez, Alicante, Spain
    VISSUM/ Instituto Oftalmologico de Alicante, Alicante, Spain
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships A. Cervino, None; S.L. Hosking, None; R. Montes-Mico, None; J.L. Alio, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2007, Vol.48, 5423. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      A. Cervino, S. L. Hosking, R. Montes-Mico, J. L. Alio; Subjective Perception of Light Scatter in Patients Treated With Monofocal and Multifocal Intraocular Lens Implants. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2007;48(13):5423.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Purpose:: To determine intraocular scatter measured subjectively in patients with monofocal and multifocal intraocular lens implants (IOLs).

Methods:: Residual mean square error (MSE), contrast sensitivity (CS:9% Bailey-Lovie), subjective retinal straylight (RSL:C-Quant) were measured in 64 eyes of 40 pseudophakic patients: Group 1 (mean age 71.81±9.20y) treated with monofocal IOLs (n=15 ThinOptix, ThinOptx Inc, n=17 AcriSmart 48S, AcriTec); Group 2 (mean age 65.52±11.97y) treated with multifocal IOLs (n=10 Acrysof ReSTOR, Alcon; n=22 ReZoom, AMO). All investigations were conducted with a natural pupil and between 6 months and 1 year after implantation. ANOVA was used to establish differences between groups; Pearsons product moment analysis assessed the relationship of RSL to all parameters.

Results:: The two groups were similar for residual mean square error, pupil size, age, CS and RSL. RSL values exhibited a significant trend with CS (r=0.327; p=0.008), age (r=0.339, p=0.010) and pupil size (r=-0.282, p=0.024) for all the patients, regardless of the lens type. Within groups, straylight values were associated with pupil size for the monofocal group (r=-0.377, p=0.033) and contrast sensitivity in the multifocal group (r=0.397, p=0.024). There were no within-group differences by lens type for either RSL or CS.

Conclusions:: For the four lens types used, there were no differences in CS or subjective perceptions of scatter as measured using the C-Quant. However, perceived light scatter increases with age, diminishing pupil size and is associated with poorer contrast function.

Keywords: intraocular lens • optical properties • presbyopia 

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.