Impact of Lens Material on Objective Refraction in Eyes with Trifocal Diffractive Intraocular Lenses
Purpose: Compare subjective (Rx) and objective (ObjRx) refractions outcomes with two autorefractors models and an aberrometer in eyes implanted with a hydrophobic trifocal IOL (FineVision POD F GF, Physiol, Liége, Belgium) and a hydrophilic one (FineVision POD F, Physiol, Liége, Belgium). Methods: P...
| Autores: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | España |
| Recursos: | Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM) |
| Repositorio: | Docta Complutense |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/88768 |
| Acesso em linha: | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/88768 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palavra-chave: | 617.7-089.243 681.73 Optics Hydrophilic Hydrophobic Intraocular lens Refraction Trifocal diffractive Óptica y optometría Óptica oftálmica Materiales ópticos 2209.15 Optometría 3311.09 Lentes 2406.05 Bioóptica |
| Resumo: | Purpose: Compare subjective (Rx) and objective (ObjRx) refractions outcomes with two autorefractors models and an aberrometer in eyes implanted with a hydrophobic trifocal IOL (FineVision POD F GF, Physiol, Liége, Belgium) and a hydrophilic one (FineVision POD F, Physiol, Liége, Belgium). Methods: Prospective comparative cohort study, with 100 subjects randomly assigned to either the POD F group (n = 50) or the POD F-GF group (n = 50). Postoperative eye examinations at 1-month visit included seven result sets, one for each assessment method: Rx, AR (automated refraction measured with the autorefractor KR8800), WF-P (Zernike-coefficients-based objective refraction, photopic pupil size), WF-M (Zernike-coefficients-based objective refraction, mesopic pupil size), WF-4 (Zernike-coefficients-based objective refraction, 4 mm pupil), OPD-C (automated refraction measured with the aberrometer OPD in the central pupil/photopic conditions), and OPD-M (automated refraction measured with the aberrometer OPD under mesopic conditions). Results: Mean differences between ObjRx and Rx reached statistical significance for sphere and spherical equivalent (M) only with OPD-C in the POD F-GF group. All ObjRx methods showed significant differences with Rx in the POD F group, with some values differing by more than 0.50 D (-0.58 D in M for the WF-P). Bland Altman plots showed better agreement for the astigmatic components and for sphere and spherical equivalents in both IOL groups measured with AR and OPD-M. Conclusions: None of the objective methods of refraction evaluated in this study were as reliable as the subjective refraction, irrespective of the lens material, but POD F-GF ObjRx seems to differ less with Rx than POD F ObjRx values. |
|---|