Abstract：Objective: To analyze visual acuity and visual quality after implantation of Zeiss 839 and Zeiss 809. Methods: In this retrospective study, a total of 54 patients (83 eyes) who underwent phacoemulsification were reviewed from August 2017 to January 2019. Twenty-eight patients (42 eyes) were implanted with Zeiss 839 trifocal lenses (839 group), and 26 patients (41 eyes) were implanted with Zeiss 809 bifocal lenses (809 group). Uncorrected visual acuity as well as visual quality were analyzed by the OQAS at 1 week, 1 month and 3 months postoperatively, and the defocus curve and the results of the questionnaire survey at 3 months postoperatively were compared between the two groups. A Paired-sample t test and repeated measures analysis of variance were used to analyze the data. Results: The 839 group had better distance uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) 1 month and 3 months postoperatively, and better intermediate UIVA at each observation time point than the 809 group (both P<0.05). The OSI, MTF cutoff, SR, PVA100%, PVA20% and PVA9% were not significantly different between the 839 group and 809 group postoperatively. The defocus curve showed that the wave form of the 839 group was more stable and higher in the range of -3 to -1 D. The incidence of glare, light and dark visual adaptation, independent spectacle ratio and satisfaction in the 839 group and 809 group were 2% vs. 7%, 93% vs. 88%, 98% vs. 78%, 90% vs. 85%, respectively. Conclusions: The trifocal IOL and bifocal IOL have excellent uncorrected near and distance vision and superior visual quality. Zeiss 839 has excellent middle distance vision, a higher independent spectacle ratio and better satisfaction.
Vega F, Alba-Bueno F, Millán MS, et al. Halo and through-focus performance of four diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2015, 56(6): 3967-3975. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.15-16600.
[4]
Sieburth R, Chen M. Intraocular lens correction of presbyopia. Taiwan J Ophthalmol, 2019, 9(1): 4-17. DOI: 10.4103/tjo. tjo_136_18.
[5]
Yoon CH, Shin IS, Kim MK. Trifocal versus bifocal diffractive intraocular lens implantation after cataract surgery or refractive lens exchange: a Meta-analysis. J Korean Med Sci, 2018, 33(44): e275. DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e275.
Kamiya K, Umeda K, Kobashi H, et al. Effect of aging on optical quality and intraocular scattering using the doublepass instrument. Curr Eye Res, 2012, 37(10): 884-888. DOI: 10.3109/02713683.2012.688164.
Mojzis P, Kukuckova L, Majerova K, et al. Postoperative visual performance with a bifocal and trifocal diffractive intraocular lens during a 1-year follow-up. Int J Ophthalmol, 2017, 10(10): 1528-1533. DOI: 10.18240/ijo.2017.10.08.
Yang JJ, Liu QP, Li JM, et al. Comparison of visual out comes with implantation of trifocal versus bifocal intraocular lens after phacoemulsification: A meta-analysis. Int J Ophthalmol, 2018, 11(3): 484-492. DOI: 10.18240/ijo.2018.03.20.
[16]
Yang Y, Lv H, Wang Y, et al. Clinical outcomes following trifocal diffractive intraocular lens implantation for age-related cataract in China. Clin Ophthalmol, 2018, 12: 1317-1324. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S169215.
[17]
Kim BH, Hyon JY, Kim MK. Effects of bifocal versus trifocal diffractive intraocular lens implantation on visual quality after cataract surgery. Korean J Ophthalmol, 2019, 33(4): 333-342. DOI: 10.3341/kjo.2019.0001.
[18]
Alió JL, Kaymak H, Breyer D, et al. Quality of life related variables measured for three multifocal diffractive intraocular lenses: A prospective randomised clinical trial. Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 2018, 46(4): 380-388. DOI: 10.1111/ceo.13084.
[19]
Mencucci R, Favuzza E, Caporossi O, et al. Comparative analysis of visual outcomes, reading skills, contrast sensitivity, and patient satisfaction with two models of trifocal diffractive intraocular lenses and an extended range of vision intraocular lens. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 2018, 256(10): 1913- 1922. DOI: 10.1007/s00417-018-4052-3.
浙公网安备 33030202001892号