三焦点人工晶状体与双焦点人工晶状体植入术后视力及视觉质量的对比

doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn115909-20190921-00259

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (19)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (788 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

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.

Key words： intraocular lens visual acuity optical quality independent spectacles ratio

Received: 21 September 2019

Corresponding Authors: Hong Qin, Eye Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing 100040, China (Email: drqinhong66@sina.com)

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors

Cite this article:

URL:

https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/10.3760/cma.j.cn115909-20190921-00259 OR https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/Y2020/V22/I4/262

[1]	简飞龙, 孙康, 毕伍牧, 等. 新型多焦点人工晶状体临床应用新进展. 中国临床新医学, 2019, 12(3): 338342. DOI: 10.3969/ j.issn.1674-3806.2019.03.28.
[2]	唐唯. 屈光性白内障手术新进展. 山东大学耳鼻喉眼学报, 2019, 33(2): 149-158. DOI: 10.6040/j.issn.1673-3770.0.2018. 325.
[3]	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.
[6]	余阿勇. 双通道客观视觉质量分析的临床实践. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2017: 12-14.
[7]	肖显文, 张红, 田芳. 双通道视觉质量分析系统在眼科的应用. 国际眼科纵览, 2013, 37(2): 77-82. DOI: 10.3760/cma. j.issn.1673-5803.2013.02.002.
[8]	王安琪, 陈卓, 洪朝阳. 三焦点人工晶状体应用研究的新进展. 浙江医学, 2019, 41(9): 967-971. DOI: 10.12056/j.is sn.1006-2785.2019.41.9.2019-387.
[9]	俞阿勇, 施恩, 王勤美, 等. 不同年龄段成年人眼的综合光学质量客观评估. 中华眼科杂志, 2016, 52(1): 47-50. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0412-4081.2016.01.012.
[10]	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.
[11]	宋慧, 邢晓杰, 汤欣. 三种多焦点人工晶状体眼视觉功能和光学质量OQAS评估. 中国实用眼科杂志, 2014, 32(5): 578-582. DOI: 10. 376/cma.j.issn.1006-4443.2014.05.014.
[12]	周丹, 朱怡, 朱浩斌, 等. 超声乳化联合IOL植入术围手术期瞳孔直径和反应的变化. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2019, 21(12): 910-916. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2019.12. 006.
[13]	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.
[14]	陈碧超, 谭倩, 王潇, 等. 双眼三焦点人工晶状体和双焦点人工晶状体植入术后早期视觉质量比较. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2019, 21(6): 451-459. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn. 1674-845X.2019.06.009.
[15]	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.