中年单侧白内障患者的双眼视觉功能:多焦点与增强单焦点人工晶体。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Ken Hayashi, Motoaki Yoshida, Shin-Ichi Manabe, Koichi Yoshimura
{"title":"中年单侧白内障患者的双眼视觉功能:多焦点与增强单焦点人工晶体。","authors":"Ken Hayashi, Motoaki Yoshida, Shin-Ichi Manabe, Koichi Yoshimura","doi":"10.1007/s10384-025-01190-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare binocular visual function of middle-aged patients in the process of presbyopia progression with unilateral cataract who received a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL; Alcon PanOptix<sup>®</sup>) with those who received an enhanced monofocal (EM) IOL (Johnson & Johnson Eyehance<sup>®</sup>).</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Nonrandomized comparative study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study enrolled patients in their 40s and 50s with unilateral cataract whose fellow eyes were myopic and the operated eyes were implanted with either a trifocal IOL (n=28, targeting emmetropia) or an EM IOL (n=28, targeting myopia), and patients whose fellow eyes were emmetropic and the operated eyes were implanted with a trifocal IOL (n=25, targeting emmetropia) or an EM IOL (n=23; targeting emmetropia). At 3 months postoperatively, binocular uncorrected and corrected all-distance VA and contrast VA were compared between patients receiving the trifocal and EM IOLs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the myopia category, mean binocular uncorrected VA from ∞ to 1.0 m was significantly better (P<0.001) and at near distance was significantly worse (P<0.001) in the trifocal group than in the EM group. In the emmetropia category, binocular uncorrected VA from ∞ to 2.0 m and binocular contrast VA at most contrasts were significantly better in the EM group than in the trifocal group (P≤0.043).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Trifocal IOLs provide significantly better binocular uncorrected far to intermediate VAs and worse near VA than EM IOLs in patients whose fellow eye is myopic, while EM IOLs provide significantly better far VA and contrast sensitivity in patients whose fellow eye is emmetropic.</p>","PeriodicalId":14563,"journal":{"name":"Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Binocular visual function in middle-aged patients with unilateral cataract: multifocal versus enhanced monofocal intraocular lens.\",\"authors\":\"Ken Hayashi, Motoaki Yoshida, Shin-Ichi Manabe, Koichi Yoshimura\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10384-025-01190-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare binocular visual function of middle-aged patients in the process of presbyopia progression with unilateral cataract who received a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL; Alcon PanOptix<sup>®</sup>) with those who received an enhanced monofocal (EM) IOL (Johnson & Johnson Eyehance<sup>®</sup>).</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Nonrandomized comparative study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study enrolled patients in their 40s and 50s with unilateral cataract whose fellow eyes were myopic and the operated eyes were implanted with either a trifocal IOL (n=28, targeting emmetropia) or an EM IOL (n=28, targeting myopia), and patients whose fellow eyes were emmetropic and the operated eyes were implanted with a trifocal IOL (n=25, targeting emmetropia) or an EM IOL (n=23; targeting emmetropia). At 3 months postoperatively, binocular uncorrected and corrected all-distance VA and contrast VA were compared between patients receiving the trifocal and EM IOLs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the myopia category, mean binocular uncorrected VA from ∞ to 1.0 m was significantly better (P<0.001) and at near distance was significantly worse (P<0.001) in the trifocal group than in the EM group. In the emmetropia category, binocular uncorrected VA from ∞ to 2.0 m and binocular contrast VA at most contrasts were significantly better in the EM group than in the trifocal group (P≤0.043).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Trifocal IOLs provide significantly better binocular uncorrected far to intermediate VAs and worse near VA than EM IOLs in patients whose fellow eye is myopic, while EM IOLs provide significantly better far VA and contrast sensitivity in patients whose fellow eye is emmetropic.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14563,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10384-025-01190-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10384-025-01190-7","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

摘要

目的:比较中年老花眼进展患者与单侧白内障行三焦人工晶状体植入术患者双眼视功能的变化;爱尔康PanOptix®)与接受增强型单焦点(EM)人工晶状体(强生Eyehance®)的患者。研究设计:非随机比较研究。方法:选取40 ~ 50岁的单侧白内障患者,伴眼近视,手术眼植入三焦人工晶状体(n=28,针对斜视)或EM人工晶状体(n=28,针对近视);伴眼斜视,手术眼植入三焦人工晶状体(n=25,针对斜视)或EM人工晶状体(n=23;针对正视眼)。术后3个月,比较接受三焦和EM人工晶状体的患者双眼未矫正和矫正的全距离人工晶状体和对比人工晶状体。结果:在近视类别中,双眼未矫正视差均值(∞~ 1.0 m)明显优于EM iol。结论:在同眼近视患者中,三焦iol提供的双眼未矫正远至中视差明显优于EM iol,近视差明显优于EM iol,而EM iol提供的远视差和对比敏感度明显优于EM iol。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Binocular visual function in middle-aged patients with unilateral cataract: multifocal versus enhanced monofocal intraocular lens.

Purpose: To compare binocular visual function of middle-aged patients in the process of presbyopia progression with unilateral cataract who received a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL; Alcon PanOptix®) with those who received an enhanced monofocal (EM) IOL (Johnson & Johnson Eyehance®).

Study design: Nonrandomized comparative study.

Methods: This study enrolled patients in their 40s and 50s with unilateral cataract whose fellow eyes were myopic and the operated eyes were implanted with either a trifocal IOL (n=28, targeting emmetropia) or an EM IOL (n=28, targeting myopia), and patients whose fellow eyes were emmetropic and the operated eyes were implanted with a trifocal IOL (n=25, targeting emmetropia) or an EM IOL (n=23; targeting emmetropia). At 3 months postoperatively, binocular uncorrected and corrected all-distance VA and contrast VA were compared between patients receiving the trifocal and EM IOLs.

Results: In the myopia category, mean binocular uncorrected VA from ∞ to 1.0 m was significantly better (P<0.001) and at near distance was significantly worse (P<0.001) in the trifocal group than in the EM group. In the emmetropia category, binocular uncorrected VA from ∞ to 2.0 m and binocular contrast VA at most contrasts were significantly better in the EM group than in the trifocal group (P≤0.043).

Conclusion: Trifocal IOLs provide significantly better binocular uncorrected far to intermediate VAs and worse near VA than EM IOLs in patients whose fellow eye is myopic, while EM IOLs provide significantly better far VA and contrast sensitivity in patients whose fellow eye is emmetropic.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
65
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology (JJO) was inaugurated in 1957 as a quarterly journal published in English by the Ophthalmology Department of the University of Tokyo, with the aim of disseminating the achievements of Japanese ophthalmologists worldwide. JJO remains the only Japanese ophthalmology journal published in English. In 1997, the Japanese Ophthalmological Society assumed the responsibility for publishing the Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology as its official English-language publication. Currently the journal is published bimonthly and accepts papers from authors worldwide. JJO has become an international interdisciplinary forum for the publication of basic science and clinical research papers.
×
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