Comparison of visual function and patient-reported outcomes between two full range of field intraocular lenses: a randomized controlled study.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Satish S Modi, Robert P Lehmann, Bret L Fisher, Richard E Roth, Harvey Reiser
{"title":"Comparison of visual function and patient-reported outcomes between two full range of field intraocular lenses: a randomized controlled study.","authors":"Satish S Modi, Robert P Lehmann, Bret L Fisher, Richard E Roth, Harvey Reiser","doi":"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001678","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare visual and patient-reported outcomes in patients with cataracts bilaterally implanted with PanOptix or Synergy intraocular lenses (IOLs).</p><p><strong>Settings: </strong>5 sites in the United States.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Prospective, parallel-arm randomized patient- and examiner-masked clinical study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adult cataract patients (≥22 years) were randomized (1:1) to receive bilateral PanOptix or Synergy IOL implantation. Study endpoints: Binocular uncorrected and distance-corrected VA (logMAR) at distance, intermediate (60 cm), near (40 and 33 cm); defocus curve; patient-reported visual disturbances, spectacle independence, and visual satisfaction using questionnaires at 6 months; binocular contrast sensitivity at 3 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At 6 months, PanOptix (n = 138) was non-inferior to Synergy (n = 138) IOLs for photopic binocular uncorrected and distance-corrected VA at all tested distances (P < .05). Mesopic intermediate and near VA showed a similar trend. Defocus curves showed that both IOLs provided VA of ≤0.1 logMAR from -2.50 D to +0.50 D and <0.2 logMAR at -3.00 D. A significantly lower proportion of patients with PanOptix (vs Synergy) experienced starbursts and glare (P < .05). Most patients in both groups reported never/rarely needing eyeglasses to see and high satisfaction with vision. Both IOLs provided similar binocular contrast sensitivity at 3 months under photopic and mesopic conditions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PanOptix IOLs provided a similar full range of vision, spectacle independence, and contrast sensitivity, but superior tolerance to glare and starbursts, compared to Synergy IOLs.</p>","PeriodicalId":15214,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001678","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare visual and patient-reported outcomes in patients with cataracts bilaterally implanted with PanOptix or Synergy intraocular lenses (IOLs).

Settings: 5 sites in the United States.

Design: Prospective, parallel-arm randomized patient- and examiner-masked clinical study.

Methods: Adult cataract patients (≥22 years) were randomized (1:1) to receive bilateral PanOptix or Synergy IOL implantation. Study endpoints: Binocular uncorrected and distance-corrected VA (logMAR) at distance, intermediate (60 cm), near (40 and 33 cm); defocus curve; patient-reported visual disturbances, spectacle independence, and visual satisfaction using questionnaires at 6 months; binocular contrast sensitivity at 3 months.

Results: At 6 months, PanOptix (n = 138) was non-inferior to Synergy (n = 138) IOLs for photopic binocular uncorrected and distance-corrected VA at all tested distances (P < .05). Mesopic intermediate and near VA showed a similar trend. Defocus curves showed that both IOLs provided VA of ≤0.1 logMAR from -2.50 D to +0.50 D and <0.2 logMAR at -3.00 D. A significantly lower proportion of patients with PanOptix (vs Synergy) experienced starbursts and glare (P < .05). Most patients in both groups reported never/rarely needing eyeglasses to see and high satisfaction with vision. Both IOLs provided similar binocular contrast sensitivity at 3 months under photopic and mesopic conditions.

Conclusions: PanOptix IOLs provided a similar full range of vision, spectacle independence, and contrast sensitivity, but superior tolerance to glare and starbursts, compared to Synergy IOLs.

两种全视野人工晶状体的视觉功能和患者报告结果的比较:一项随机对照研究。
目的:比较双侧白内障患者植入PanOptix或Synergy人工晶状体(iol)的视力和患者报告的结果。设置:在美国的5个站点。设计:前瞻性、平行对照、随机、患者和检查者盲临床研究。方法:成年白内障患者(≥22岁)按1:1比例随机选择双侧PanOptix或Synergy人工晶状体植入术。研究终点:双眼未矫正和距离矫正的VA (logMAR),中间(60 cm),近(40和33 cm);散焦曲线;患者报告的视力障碍、眼镜独立性和视力满意度在6个月时使用问卷调查;3个月双眼对比敏感度。结果:在6个月时,PanOptix (n = 138)在所有测试距离上的光学双眼未矫正和距离矫正VA的效果均不逊于Synergy (n = 138) iol (P < 0.05)。中、中、近VA表现出相似的趋势。离焦曲线显示,两种iol在-2.50 D至+0.50 D范围内的VA均≤0.1 logMAR。结论:PanOptix iol与Synergy iol相比具有相似的全范围视力、眼镜独立性和对比灵敏度,但对眩光和星爆的耐受性更强。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
259
审稿时长
8.5 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery (JCRS), a preeminent peer-reviewed monthly ophthalmology publication, is the official journal of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) and the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS). JCRS publishes high quality articles on all aspects of anterior segment surgery. In addition to original clinical studies, the journal features a consultation section, practical techniques, important cases, and reviews as well as basic science articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信