Wavefront aberration and accommodation power in eyes with aspheric multifocal intraocular lens implantation
Lu ZHOU,Zhen-ping HUANG,Chun-yan XUE,Feng JIANG
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1003-0808.2010.07.025
2010-01-01
Abstract:Background: The implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs) after cataract extraction can improved the distance and near vision simultaneously. Recently, the research on MIOLs maily focus at the visual quality after implantation of MIOLs. Objective: Present study was to evaluate the visual quality and pseudoaccommodation power in the patients with the implantation of an apodized diffractive mutifocal intraocular lens (MIOL). Methods: Fifty eyes (25 patients age 60-70) received phacoemulsification + intraocular lens (IOL) implantation were included in this study. The patients were randomly divided into apodized diffractive multifocal IOL group and aspherical monofocal IOL group. Acrysoft MIOL and Acrysoft SIOL were used respectively in these two groups. The wavefront aberrations of crystalline, modulation transfer function, uncorrected distanced visual acuity (UCDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UCNVA), best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA), best-corrected near visual acuity (BCNVA), distance corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA), pseudoaccommodation and the rate of off-near glasses were studied in 3 months following phacoemulsification + intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Written informed consent was obtained from each patient prior to any medical procedure. Results: UCDVA and BCDVA in the Acrysoft MIOL group were not statistically significant different from those of Acrysoft SIOL group (P > 0.05), however, the UCNVA and DCNVA were significantly increased in Acrysoft MIOL group compared to Acrysoft SIOL group (P < 0.05). No statistical differences were found in spherical aberration, 4th order high aberration and whole high-order aberrations between Acrysoft MIOL group and Acrysoft SIOL group (P > 0.05). There was no statistically dignificant difference in the MTF in the spacial frequencies of 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30 cycle/degree between two groups (P > 0.05). The accommodative range was 0.925 ± 0.549 D in Acrysoft MIOL group and 0.390 ± 0.235 D in Acrysoft SIOL group, showing a considerably difference between them (t = 4.476, P = 0.000). The rate of off-near glass in Acrysoft MIOL group was higher than in Acrysoft SIOL group (P = 0.000). Conclusion: The Acrysof ReSTOR apodized diffractive MIOL can offer excellent distance and near visual acuity, better accommodation and improved quality of life for the patients after phacoemulsification.