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。

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较三种高阶非球面增强单焦点人工晶状体(IOL)和标准非球面单焦点人工晶状体的视力表现。地点:日本福冈Hayashi眼科医院。设计:随机比较研究。方法:172例超声乳化术患者344只眼,根据人工晶体类型随机分为4组:1)Eyhance、2)Impress、3)NSP-3型增强型单焦点人工晶体和4)Tecnis型单焦点人工晶体。术后2个月,测量并比较各组远模拟距离和近模拟距离的单眼和双眼矫正视力(VA)、光观和介观对比VA、光晕和眩光症状程度。结果:3个增强单焦点IOL组在0.5、0.7和1.0 m处的平均单眼和双眼距离矫正的中间VA明显优于标准单焦点IOL组(P≤0.04),而在0.3、2.0、3.0、5.0和∞m处的平均远近距离矫正VAs在4组间差异无统计学意义。平均光度和介观对比VA以及光晕和眩光症状的大小和强度在组间无显著差异。结论:评估的三种增强单焦点IOL类型比标准单焦点IOL提供了明显更好的中间VA,对比敏感度或光症状没有明显恶化。三种增强单焦点IOL类型的所有视觉性能测试结果都具有可比性,这表明增强单焦点IOL可以作为标准单焦点IOL的替代品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

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
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信