Stereo-Acuity in Patients Implanted with Multifocal Intraocular Lenses: Is the Choice of Stereotest Relevant?

Purpose: A randomized and double-blinded study design was implemented to assess the stereo-acuity in patients symmetrically implanted with four types of multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs), compared to a monofocal lens (control group). In addition, the influence of the type of test employed for th...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: Varon, C, Gil, MA, Alba-Bueno, F, Cardona, G, Vega, F, Millan, MS, Buil, JA
Formato: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2014
País:España
Recursos:Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau)
Repositorio:r-IIB SANT PAU. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica del Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Sant Pau
OAI Identifier:oai:iibsantpau.fundanetsuite.com:p9227
Acesso em linha:https://iibsantpau.fundanetsuite.com/Publicaciones/ProdCientif/PublicacionFrw.aspx?id=9227
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palavra-chave:Cataract surgery
chromatic aberration
diffractive optics
multifocal intraocular lens
stereo-acuity
Descrição
Resumo:Purpose: A randomized and double-blinded study design was implemented to assess the stereo-acuity in patients symmetrically implanted with four types of multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs), compared to a monofocal lens (control group). In addition, the influence of the type of test employed for the evaluation of stereo-acuity was explored. Materials and Methods: Six months after cataract intervention, stereo-acuity was measured with the Titmus and TNO stereotests in 143 patients implanted with one of the following MIOL lens types: hybrid spherical SN60D3, hybrid aspheric SN6AD1, diffractive aspheric ZMA00 and refractive spherical NXG1. A control group implanted with the monofocal aspheric ZA9003 (in which stereo-acuity was measured with a near addition) was also included in the study. Results: Statistically significant better stereo-acuity was found in the monofocal group with both stereotests (except for the SN60D3 group with the Titmus test) (all p<0.001). No significant differences in stereo-acuity between MIOLs were found using the Titmus test. However, with the TNO, patients implanted with hybrid diffractive MIOLs exhibited statistically significant worse stereo-acuity than those with the refractive design (SN60D3, p<0.001; SN6AD1, p = 0.006). Conclusions: Patients implanted with MIOLs have worse stereo-acuity than those implanted with monofocal IOLs due to the decrease in retinal image contrast originating in the simultaneous presence of two images. Awavelength-based stereotest such as the TNO induces large differences in image contrast between fellow eyes implanted with diffractive-based MIOLs, which may result in an underestimation of the real stereo-acuity of the patient.