Stephanie Bandelow
Augenoptik Doman, Germany
Title: Comparison of 4 multifocal intraocular lenses with respect to spectacle independency and potential follow up treatment
Biography
Biography: Stephanie Bandelow
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the clinical outcome of visual acuities and spectacle independency of four different multifocal intraocular lenses (MFIOLs) (ReZoom, Tecnis, Acrysof Restor SN60D3, and Acrysof Restor SN6AD1) based on information reported in the international literature and to investigate a potential follow up treatment.
Methods: Comparative clinical trials that involved bilateral implanting MFIOLs in patients with cataract were extracted from the literature. Clinical outcomes included uncorrected distance visual acuity, binocular distance corrected visual acuity, uncorrected intermediate visual acuity, binocular distance corrected intermediate visual acuity, uncorrected near visual acuity, binocular distance corrected near visual acuity and spectacle independency. All visual acuity declarations were transformed in LogMAR if needed. The statistical results are based on mean visual acuities ±SE.
Results: Six papers were identified describing four MFIOLs (ReZoom, Tecnis, Acrysof Restor SN60D3, and Acrysof Restor SN6AD1). UCDVA was 0.09±0.04, 0.10±0.01, 0.15 ±0.01 and 0.05 ±0.03 LogMAR. The spherical Acrysof Restor SN60D3 had the poorest result. The best result was performed by the Acrysof Restor SN6AD1. BDCVA was 0.06 ±0.01, 0.02 ±0.01, 0.08 ±0.01 and 0.03 ±0.01 LogMAR. UCIVA was 0.10±0.04, 0.22±0.00, 0.22 ±0.00 and 0.16 ±0.01 LogMAR. Tecnis and Acrysof Restor SN60D1 had the worst results, while the best result was performed by the ReZoom. BDCIVA was 0.10±0.04, 0.21±0.00, 0.30 ±0.00 and 0.17±0.02 LogMAR. Even here, the results from Tecnis and Acrysof Restor SN60D3 were inferior compared to the other MFIOLs. The UCNVA in 40 cm was 0.26±0.03, 0.14±0.01, 0.15±0.03 and 0.09±0.04 LogMAR. Best result was performed by the Acrysof Restor SN6AD1; the worst outcome was by ReZoom. BDCNVA in 40 cm was 0.20±0.02, 0.09 ±0.04, 0.13 ±0.04 and 0.05±0.05 LogMAR. The statements from the UCNVA are transmittable. The UCNVA in 33 cm was 0.30±0.00, 0.01±0.01, 0.18 ±0.00 and 0.18±0.00 LogMAR. The difference between the ReZoom and the Tecnis is disproportionate. While the Tecnis has invincible outcome, the performance of the ReZoom is poor in this distant. BDCNVA in 33 cm was 0.31±0.00, 0.12±0.00, 0.15±0.00 and 0.15±0.00 LogMAR. The spectacle independence rate was highest in the Acrysof Restor SN6AD1 group, followed by the Acrysof Restor SN60D3 group. The worst results were in the ReZoom group.
Conclusion: All MFIOLs provide a good uncorrected and binocular distance corrected visual acuity. In the intermediate area the ReZoom has the best result. The performance of the Acrysof Restor SN60D3 is poorest for this distance. In the near area, the ReZoom has the worst results in 40 cm and 33 cm. The Tecnis has the best performance in the distance of 33cm. The Acrysof Restor SN6AD1 and the Acrysof Restor SN60D3 have higher spectacle independency rates compared with the other multifocal IOLs. A complete spectacle independency was mostly not reached by any type of MFIOL.