不同原理仪器引导的球差个性化人工晶状体植入可行性及视觉质量观察

doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2013.05.011

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (18)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (753 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract

Objective To compare visual quality after using an iTrace Aberrometer or Pentacam system to guide personalized aspheric intraocular lenses （IOLs） implantations； to discuss the feasibility of using the 2 instruments to guide IOL implantation or whole eye spherical aberrations About +0.1 μm. Methods This was a prospective clinical study. One day before phacoemulsification and aspheric IOL implantation surgery， a Pentacam or iTrace aberrometer was used to measure corneal spherical aberrations （Z40） under a 6 mm pupil diameter of patients with age-related cataract. Fifty-five patients （58 eyes were divided into an iTrace group （31 eyes） and a Pentacam group （27 eyes）. Tecnis IOLs， AcrySof IQ IOLs or ADAPT-AO IOLs were implanted in these patients based on the measurement results so that the patient′s predictive value of the whole eye spherical aberration was in the range of 0.05-0.15 μm after surgery. After 3 months， uncorrected visual acuity （UCVA）， best corrected visual acuity （BCVA）， modulation transfer function （MTF） for less than a 6 mm pupil diameter， spherical aberrations of the whole and inside eye were measured. The relevant data were analyzed using a paired t test and independent samples t test. Results ① After surgery， the UCVA and BCVA were compared for the 2 groups. The differences were not statistically significant （UCVA： t=0.83， P>0.05； BCVA： t=0.37， P>0.05）. ②All predicted preoperative whole eye spherical aberrations under a 6 mm pupil diameter were compared to +0.1 μm for the 2 groups. The differences were not statistically significant （iTrace group： t=- 1.70， P>0.05； Pentacam group： t=0.64， P>0.05）. After surgery， the actual spherical aberrations of the 2 groups under a 6 mm pupil diameter were compared to +0.1 μm. The difference for the iTrace group was not statistically significant （t=0.58， P>0.05）， but there was a statistically significant difference for the Pentacam group （t=2.33， P<0.05）. ③The difference in the predicted values of the preoperative spherical aberrations of the whole eye and the actual values after surgery were not statistically significant （iTrace group： t=-1.55， P>0.05； Pentacam group： t=-2.04， P>0.05）. The actual spherical aberrations of the inside eye after surgery vs. spherical aberrations of IOLs and the differences were not statistically significant （iTrace group： t=-1.55， P>0.05； Pentacam group t=0.73， P>0.05）. The difference between the 2 groups′actual values of the spherical aberrations of the whole eye was not statistically significant （t=1.52， P>0.05）. ④After surgery， under a 6 mm pupil diameter at 5， 10， 15， 20， 25 and 30 cycles per degree （c/d） spatial frequencies， the differences in the values of the MTFs of higher-order aberration between the 2 groups were not statistically significant （t=0.88， 0.47， 0.34， 0.02， -0.57， -0.23， P>0.05） and the differences in the values of the MTFs of spherical aberration for the 2 groups were not statistically significant （t=-0.37， -0.46， -0.43， -0.39， -0.68， -1.08， P>0.05）. Conclusion The 2 groups that underwent 2 different instrument-guided aspheric IOL implantations can achieve satisfactory targets for spherical aberrations. The iTrace group′s predictive value is closer to the actual value than the Pentacam group′s. Aspheric IOL implantation surgery guided with either instrument can achieve good postoperative visual quality.

Key words： Pentacam iTrace Phacoemulsification Aspheric intraocular lens Spherical aberration Modulation transfer function

Received: 21 March 2013

Corresponding Authors: TANG Xin

About author:: LIU Lei

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	LIU Lei
	TANG Xin
	SONG Hui

Cite this article:

LIU Lei,TANG Xin,SONG Hui. Observation of visual quality and feasibility with different principles instruments to guide the intraocular lens implantation that personalized spherical aberration[J]. Chinese Journal of Optometry Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 2013, 15(5): 299-304.

URL:

https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2013.05.011 OR https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/Y2013/V15/I5/299

[1]	Liang J， Grimm B， Goelz S， et al． Objective measurement of waveaberrations of the human eye with the use of Hartmann-Shack wave-front sensor． J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis，1994，11：1949-1957．
[2]	瞿小妹. 角膜接触镜与视觉质量的研究进展与评价. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志，2012，14：65-67.
[3]	McLellan JS， Marcos S， Prieto PM， et al． Imperfect optics may be the eye′s defense against chromatic blur. J Nature，2002， 417：174-176．
[4]	Levy Y， Segal O， Avni I， et al． Ocular higher-order aberration in eyes with supemormal vision. Am J Ophthalmol，2005，139：225-228．
[5]	许琛琛，王勤美，陶育华，等. 角膜前表面高阶像差与年龄的相关性变化. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志，2011，13：210-213.
[6]	Klyce S. Night vision after LASIK. Ophthalmology，2004，111：1-2.
[7]	Wang L， Koch DD． Ocular higher-order aberrations in individuals screened for refractive surgery． J Cataract Refract Surg，2003， 29：1896-1903．
[8]	Beiko GH. Personalized correction of spherical aberration in cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg，2007，33：1455-1460.
[9]	Packer M， Fine IH， Hoffman RS. Aspheric intraocular lens selection based on corneal wavefront. J Refract Surg，2009，25：12-20.
[10]	连慧芳，汤欣，宋慧. 超声乳化白内障吸除术前角膜球差对相对个性化非球面人工晶状体植入的影响. 中华眼科杂志，2010， 46：410-414.
[11]	Guirao A， Tejedor J， Artal P. Corneal aberrations before and after small-incision cataract surgery. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci，2004，45：4312-4319.
[12]	王娟，汤欣，张帅，等. 超声乳化白内障吸除术后角膜前后表面高阶像差的变化. 中华眼科杂志，2008，44：1066-1071.
[13]	Siesta V， Dubbelman M， Van der Heijde RG． Spherical aberration of the anterior and posterior surfaces of the human cornea． J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis，2006，23：544-549．
[14]	张帅，汤欣，张一凡，等. Pentacam与iTrace像差仪在白内障患者角膜像差测量中的应用. 眼科研究，2010，28： 984-988.
[15]	Campbell CE． Improving visual function diagnostic metrics with the use of higher-order aberration Information from the eye． J Cataract Refract Surg，2004，20：495-503．
[16]	Applegate RA， Ballentine C， Gross H， et al. Visual acuity as a function of Zernike mode and level of root mean square error. J Optom Vis Sci，2003，80：97-105.
[17]	Diaz-Douton F， Benito A， Pujol J， et al. Comparison of the retinal image quality with a Hartmann-Shack wavefront sensor and a double-pass instrument. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci，2006，47：1710-1716.
[18]	Applegate RA， Marsack JD， Ramos R， et al. Interaction between aberrations to improve or reduce visual performance. J Cataract Refract Surg，2003，29：1487-1495.