February 2007

 

CATARACT/ IOL

 

Second-generation multi-focal intraocular lenses versus Array SA40N intraocular lens


 

 

A study published in the December issue of the Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery found three different multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) to perform differently under different lighting conditions.

The prospective study, conducted by Werner W. Hьtz, M.D., Klinikum Bad Hersfeld, Bad Hersfeld, Germany, and colleagues, assessed the reading performance of the Array SA40N IOL (Advanced Medical Optics, AMO, Santa Ana, Calif.), Tecnis ZM001 IOL (AMO) and the AcrySof ReSTOR SA60D3 IOL (Alcon, Fort Worth, Tex.) under different lighting conditions based on reading acuity and reading speed tests. The randomized study included 120 eyes of 60 cataract patients (120 eyes) who were randomly assigned into three groups each receiving one of the three IOLs. The evaluation of pupil size and reading ability at near (visual acuity, reading speed) distances without correction, with best distance correction, and with best near correction was conducted six weeks post-op under low-light conditions (6 cd/m(2)) and bright-light conditions (100 cd/m(2)) using the Radner Reading Charts.

In analyzing their results, researchers noted, “Six weeks postoperatively, there was no significant difference between the groups in pupil size measured under low-light (6 cd/m(2)) or bright-light (100 cd/m(2)) conditions.”

Under low-light conditions, the group that was administered the Tecnis ZM001 IOL performed better in near visual acuity and reading speed with or without correction, than the other two groups the researchers wrote. The other two groups did not show any significant differences between one another. In addition, the both the Tecnis group and the AcrySof ReSTOR group performed significantly better than the SA40N group under bright-light conditions, and the Tecnis group performed better than the AcrySof ReSTOR group under these conditions.

“Under bright-light conditions, second-generation multifocal IOLs provided better reading performance than the Array SA40N IOL,” the study authors concluded. “However, when tested under low-light conditions, patients with the Tecnis ZM001 IOL had the best reading acuity and reading speed.”

Source: Hutz WW, Eckhardt HB, Rohrin B, and Grolmus R. JCRS 2006; 32(12):2015-2021.

Reported by: EyeWorld News Service

Second-generation multi-focal intraocular lenses versus Array SA40N intraocular lens Second-generation multi-focal intraocular lenses versus Array SA40N intraocular lens
Ophthalmology News - EyeWorld Magazine
283 110
283 110
,
2016-07-26T13:36:19Z
True, 2