{"title":"正常、分散和倾斜条件下各种眼内透镜调制传递函数的比较分析","authors":"Andi Masdipa , Yuji Matsuda , Sachiko Kaidzu , Masaki Tanito","doi":"10.1016/j.ajoint.2024.100069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>This study aims to compare the modulation transfer function (MTF) of different intraocular lenses (IOLs) under normal, decentration, and tilt conditions to evaluate their optical performance.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Experimental setting.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A total of 12 IOL models (+20 D diopter, <em>n</em> = 3 each) were measured for MTF using the OptiSpheric IOL system with a 3 mm aperture diameter at a water temperature of 35 °C. Measurements were made with a spatial frequency of 0 - 200 lp/mm at the normal, decentration of 0.5 mm, and tilt of 5° positions.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The MTF values were significantly different between normal and decentration conditions for XY1A (monofocal, toric) (<em>P</em> = 0.03), Tecnis ZCB00V (<em>P</em> = 0.0009), and NS-60YG (<em>P</em> = 0.004). Differences were significant between normal and tilt conditions for MP70 (<em>P</em> = 0.009), XY1 (<em>P</em> = 0.0005), and Clareon (<em>P</em> = 0.049), and were significant between decentration and tilt conditions only for LentisComfort (bifocal) (<em>P</em> = 0.01). With normal condition, MTF of Eyhance DIB00V (extended depth of focus) showed significant differences with 11 other IOLs (<em>P</em> < 0.0001), while LentisComfort exhibited differences with 10 other IOLs (<em>P</em> < 0.0001) except for XY1A (<em>P</em> = 0.0002). Similarly, with decentration condition, Eyhance DIB00V differed significantly from 11 other IOLs (<em>P</em> < 0.0001). With tilt condition, Eyhance DIB00V showed significant differences with 10 other IOLs (<em>P</em> < 0.0001) except for LentisComfort, which itself differed significantly from 10 other IOLs (<em>P</em> < 0.0001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In the experimental settings, while specialized IOLs can address specific visual issues, monofocal IOLs remain superior in terms of overall contrast transfer quality and resolution even in the implanted IOL position is not ideal. These results provide a basis for recommending the use of monofocal IOLs in cases where the anterior chamber depth and lens position are prone to instability, such as in eyes with weakened zonules or following glaucoma filtering surgery.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100071,"journal":{"name":"AJO International","volume":"1 4","pages":"Article 100069"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative analysis of modulation transfer function in various intraocular lenses under normal, decentration, and tilt conditions\",\"authors\":\"Andi Masdipa , Yuji Matsuda , Sachiko Kaidzu , Masaki Tanito\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ajoint.2024.100069\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>This study aims to compare the modulation transfer function (MTF) of different intraocular lenses (IOLs) under normal, decentration, and tilt conditions to evaluate their optical performance.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Experimental setting.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A total of 12 IOL models (+20 D diopter, <em>n</em> = 3 each) were measured for MTF using the OptiSpheric IOL system with a 3 mm aperture diameter at a water temperature of 35 °C. Measurements were made with a spatial frequency of 0 - 200 lp/mm at the normal, decentration of 0.5 mm, and tilt of 5° positions.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The MTF values were significantly different between normal and decentration conditions for XY1A (monofocal, toric) (<em>P</em> = 0.03), Tecnis ZCB00V (<em>P</em> = 0.0009), and NS-60YG (<em>P</em> = 0.004). Differences were significant between normal and tilt conditions for MP70 (<em>P</em> = 0.009), XY1 (<em>P</em> = 0.0005), and Clareon (<em>P</em> = 0.049), and were significant between decentration and tilt conditions only for LentisComfort (bifocal) (<em>P</em> = 0.01). With normal condition, MTF of Eyhance DIB00V (extended depth of focus) showed significant differences with 11 other IOLs (<em>P</em> < 0.0001), while LentisComfort exhibited differences with 10 other IOLs (<em>P</em> < 0.0001) except for XY1A (<em>P</em> = 0.0002). Similarly, with decentration condition, Eyhance DIB00V differed significantly from 11 other IOLs (<em>P</em> < 0.0001). With tilt condition, Eyhance DIB00V showed significant differences with 10 other IOLs (<em>P</em> < 0.0001) except for LentisComfort, which itself differed significantly from 10 other IOLs (<em>P</em> < 0.0001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In the experimental settings, while specialized IOLs can address specific visual issues, monofocal IOLs remain superior in terms of overall contrast transfer quality and resolution even in the implanted IOL position is not ideal. These results provide a basis for recommending the use of monofocal IOLs in cases where the anterior chamber depth and lens position are prone to instability, such as in eyes with weakened zonules or following glaucoma filtering surgery.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJO International\",\"volume\":\"1 4\",\"pages\":\"Article 100069\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJO International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950253524000698\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJO International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950253524000698","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative analysis of modulation transfer function in various intraocular lenses under normal, decentration, and tilt conditions
Purpose
This study aims to compare the modulation transfer function (MTF) of different intraocular lenses (IOLs) under normal, decentration, and tilt conditions to evaluate their optical performance.
Design
Experimental setting.
Methods
A total of 12 IOL models (+20 D diopter, n = 3 each) were measured for MTF using the OptiSpheric IOL system with a 3 mm aperture diameter at a water temperature of 35 °C. Measurements were made with a spatial frequency of 0 - 200 lp/mm at the normal, decentration of 0.5 mm, and tilt of 5° positions.
Results
The MTF values were significantly different between normal and decentration conditions for XY1A (monofocal, toric) (P = 0.03), Tecnis ZCB00V (P = 0.0009), and NS-60YG (P = 0.004). Differences were significant between normal and tilt conditions for MP70 (P = 0.009), XY1 (P = 0.0005), and Clareon (P = 0.049), and were significant between decentration and tilt conditions only for LentisComfort (bifocal) (P = 0.01). With normal condition, MTF of Eyhance DIB00V (extended depth of focus) showed significant differences with 11 other IOLs (P < 0.0001), while LentisComfort exhibited differences with 10 other IOLs (P < 0.0001) except for XY1A (P = 0.0002). Similarly, with decentration condition, Eyhance DIB00V differed significantly from 11 other IOLs (P < 0.0001). With tilt condition, Eyhance DIB00V showed significant differences with 10 other IOLs (P < 0.0001) except for LentisComfort, which itself differed significantly from 10 other IOLs (P < 0.0001).
Conclusions
In the experimental settings, while specialized IOLs can address specific visual issues, monofocal IOLs remain superior in terms of overall contrast transfer quality and resolution even in the implanted IOL position is not ideal. These results provide a basis for recommending the use of monofocal IOLs in cases where the anterior chamber depth and lens position are prone to instability, such as in eyes with weakened zonules or following glaucoma filtering surgery.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
