Objective To compare the accommodation amplitude after different aspheric monofocal posterior chamber intraocular lenses （IOLs） implantation. Methods A prospective clinical study comprised 102 eyes of 102 patients who underwent phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation in Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital from August 2010 to August 2011. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to the type of IOLs that implanted： Group Rayner were implanted with Rayner Superflex 920H IOL （Rayner）； Group SN60WF were implanted with Acrysof IQ SN60WF IOL （Alcon）； Group SN60AT were implanted with Acrysof NATURAL SN60AT IOL （Alcon）. At 6 months postoperatively， uncorrected visual acuity， best corrected visual acuity， distance corrected near visual acuity were evaluated. Spherical aberration was measured by Hartmann-Shack wavefront sensor. Patients′ subjective amplitude of accommodation was measured by integrated refractometer adjustment feet； while the objective amplitude of accommodation was measured by WR-5100 automatic computer Refractometer （GrandSeiko）. Statistical analysis of count data and measurement data were done separately by the chi-square test and variance analysis. Pearson correlation was performed to analyze the association between parameters. Results The subjective amplitude of accommodation in the 3 groups were 2.00±0.58 D， 2.26±0.60 D， 2.29±0.48 D， respectively， while the objective amplitude of accommodation in the three groups were 0.87±0.37 D， 1.01±0.38 D， 1.04±0.37 D， respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the subjective and objective amplitude of accommodation in the 3 groups （Fsub=2.662， Psub=0.075； Fob=1.925， Pob=0.151）. When the pupil diameter was 3 mm， the spherical aberrations of the three groups were 0.08±0.04 μm， 0.05±0.04 μm， 0.14±0.05 μm， respectively. The difference of spherical aberration among the three groups was statistically significant （F=45.780， P<0.01）. No correlation was found in the spherical aberration with subjective or objective amplitude of accommodation （rsub=0.056， Psub=0.576； rob=0.095， Pob=0.343）. Conclusion Compared with the implantation of Acrysof SN60AT spherical intraocular lens， the implantation of the Acrysof SN60WF aspheric intraocular lens and Rayner Superflex 920H aspheric intraocular lens do not affect the amplitude of accommodation significantly. No correlation is found between spherical aberration and subjective or objective amplitude of accommodation.
杨军,田芳,张红. 不同非球面人工晶状体植入术后调节幅度的比较[J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2013, 15(4): 198-201.
YANG Jun,TIAN Fang,ZHANG Hong. Contrast studies on the accommodation amplitude after different aspheric intraocular lenses implantation. Chinese Journal of Optometry Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 2013, 15(4): 198-201. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2013.04.002
Glasser A. Accommodation： mechanism and measurement. Ophthalmol Clin North Am，2006，19：1-12.
[2]
Sugitani Y， Komori T， Katoh R， et al. Apparent accommodation （pseudoaccomm-odation） on pesudophakia. Floia Ophthalmol Jpn，1979，30：326-333.
[3]
Menapace R， Findl.K O， Kriechbaum K， et al. Accommodating intraocular lenses： a critical review of present and future concepts. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol，2007，245：473-489.
[4]
Langenbucher A. Accommodative response measures vary with different tests： researchers study pseudophakic patients with accommodative posterior chamber IOLs. Ophthalmology Times， 2003，15：134-137.
[5]
Lim TH， Lee JR， Choi KY， et al. Anterior and posterior coeneal spherical aberration measured with pentacam in the Korean. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc，2010，51：816-821.
[6]
Radhakrishnan H， Charman WN. Age-Related changes in ocular aberrations with accommodation. J Vis，2007，7：1-21.
[7]
Smith G， Cox MJ， Calver R， et al. The spherical aberration of the crystalline lens of the human eye. Vision Res，2001，41：235-243.
[8]
Artal P， Guirao A， Berrio E， et al. Compensation of corneal aberrations by the internal optics in the human eye. J Vis，2001，1：1-8.
[9]
Luis C， Ana L， lberto O， et al. Post operative optical aberrations in eyes implanted with AcrySof spherical and aspheric intraocular lenses. J Refract Surg，2008，24：811-816.
[10]
Cheng X， Bradley A， Thibos LN. Predicting subjective judgment of best focus with objective image quality metrics. J Vis，2004，4：310-321.
[11]
Marcos S， Barbero S， Jiménez-Alfaro I. Optical quality and depth-of-field of eyes implanted with spherical and aspheric intraocular lenses. J Refract Surg，2005，21：223-235.
[12]
Tabernero J， Piers P， Benito A， et al. Predicting the optical performance of eyes implanted with IOLs to correct spherical aberration. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci，2006，47：4651-4658.
[13]
Nanavaty MA， Spalton DJ， Boyce J， et al. Wavefront aberrations， depth of focus， and contrast sensitivity with aspheric and spherical intraocular lenses： fellow-eye study. J Cataract Refract Surg，2009，35：663-671.
浙公网安备 33030202001892号