Shunsuke Hayashi, Motoaki Yoshida, Ken Hayashi, Kazuno Negishi
{"title":"三种高阶非球面增强单焦人工晶状体与标准非球面单焦人工晶状体的视觉性能比较。","authors":"Shunsuke Hayashi, Motoaki Yoshida, Ken Hayashi, Kazuno Negishi","doi":"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001734","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare visual performance among three types of higher-order aspheric enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses (IOL) and a standard aspheric monofocal IOL.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Hayashi Eye Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Randomized comparative study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three hundred forty-four eyes of 172 patients scheduled for phacoemulsification were randomly assigned to one of four groups according to the IOL type: three types of enhanced monofocal IOL, 1) Eyhance, 2) Impress, and 3) NSP-3, and a standard monofocal IOL, 4) Tecnis monofocal. At 2 months postoperatively, monocular and binocular distance-corrected visual acuity (VA) from far to near simulated distances, photopic and mesopic contrast VA, and degree of halo and glare symptoms were measured and compared among groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean monocular and binocular distance-corrected intermediate VA at 0.5, 0.7, and 1.0 m was essentially better in the three enhanced monofocal IOL groups than in the standard monofocal IOL group (P ≤ .04), whereas mean far and near distance-corrected VAs at 0.3, 2.0, 3.0, 5.0, and ∞ m did not differ significantly among the four groups. Mean photopic and mesopic contrast VA and the size and intensity of halo and glare symptoms did not differ significantly among groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The three enhanced monofocal IOL types evaluated provided significantly better intermediate VA than a standard monofocal IOL with no significant deterioration in contrast sensitivity or photic symptoms. All visual performance test results examined were comparable among the three enhanced monofocal IOL types, suggesting that enhanced monofocal IOLs can serve as a replacement for standard monofocal IOLs.</p>","PeriodicalId":15214,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of visual performance among three higher-order aspheric enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses and a standard aspheric monofocal lens.\",\"authors\":\"Shunsuke Hayashi, Motoaki Yoshida, Ken Hayashi, Kazuno Negishi\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001734\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare visual performance among three types of higher-order aspheric enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses (IOL) and a standard aspheric monofocal IOL.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Hayashi Eye Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Randomized comparative study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three hundred forty-four eyes of 172 patients scheduled for phacoemulsification were randomly assigned to one of four groups according to the IOL type: three types of enhanced monofocal IOL, 1) Eyhance, 2) Impress, and 3) NSP-3, and a standard monofocal IOL, 4) Tecnis monofocal. At 2 months postoperatively, monocular and binocular distance-corrected visual acuity (VA) from far to near simulated distances, photopic and mesopic contrast VA, and degree of halo and glare symptoms were measured and compared among groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean monocular and binocular distance-corrected intermediate VA at 0.5, 0.7, and 1.0 m was essentially better in the three enhanced monofocal IOL groups than in the standard monofocal IOL group (P ≤ .04), whereas mean far and near distance-corrected VAs at 0.3, 2.0, 3.0, 5.0, and ∞ m did not differ significantly among the four groups. Mean photopic and mesopic contrast VA and the size and intensity of halo and glare symptoms did not differ significantly among groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The three enhanced monofocal IOL types evaluated provided significantly better intermediate VA than a standard monofocal IOL with no significant deterioration in contrast sensitivity or photic symptoms. All visual performance test results examined were comparable among the three enhanced monofocal IOL types, suggesting that enhanced monofocal IOLs can serve as a replacement for standard monofocal IOLs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-07\",\"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.0000000000001734\",\"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":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001734","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of visual performance among three higher-order aspheric enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses and a standard aspheric monofocal lens.
Purpose: To compare visual performance among three types of higher-order aspheric enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses (IOL) and a standard aspheric monofocal IOL.
Setting: Hayashi Eye Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan.
Design: Randomized comparative study.
Methods: Three hundred forty-four eyes of 172 patients scheduled for phacoemulsification were randomly assigned to one of four groups according to the IOL type: three types of enhanced monofocal IOL, 1) Eyhance, 2) Impress, and 3) NSP-3, and a standard monofocal IOL, 4) Tecnis monofocal. At 2 months postoperatively, monocular and binocular distance-corrected visual acuity (VA) from far to near simulated distances, photopic and mesopic contrast VA, and degree of halo and glare symptoms were measured and compared among groups.
Results: Mean monocular and binocular distance-corrected intermediate VA at 0.5, 0.7, and 1.0 m was essentially better in the three enhanced monofocal IOL groups than in the standard monofocal IOL group (P ≤ .04), whereas mean far and near distance-corrected VAs at 0.3, 2.0, 3.0, 5.0, and ∞ m did not differ significantly among the four groups. Mean photopic and mesopic contrast VA and the size and intensity of halo and glare symptoms did not differ significantly among groups.
Conclusions: The three enhanced monofocal IOL types evaluated provided significantly better intermediate VA than a standard monofocal IOL with no significant deterioration in contrast sensitivity or photic symptoms. All visual performance test results examined were comparable among the three enhanced monofocal IOL types, suggesting that enhanced monofocal IOLs can serve as a replacement for standard monofocal IOLs.
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.