Copenhagen 2016 Registration Programme Exhibitor Information Virtual Exhibition Satellite Meetings Glaucoma Day 2016 Hotel Star Alliance
title

10 - 14 Sept. 2016, Bella Center, Copenhagen, Denmark

This Meeting has been awarded 27 CME credits

 

escrs app advert yo advert

Posters

Search Title by author or title

Dysphotopsia in patients implanted with segmental bifocal intraocular lenses

Poster Details

First Author: S. Shah UNITED KINGDOM

Co Author(s):    J. Wolffsohn   S. Naroo   L. Davies   T. Drew   E. Berrow   R. Gil-Cazorla     

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To understand and quantify the phenomenon of dysphotopsia in patients implanted with segmental bifocal intraocular lenses and compare to monofocal and diffractive multifocal lenses

Setting:

Private ambulatory care centre

Methods:

Forty-five patients (aged 61.8±8.9 years) implanted bilaterally with Tecnis ZM900 (diffractive multifocal), SBL-3 (segmented refractive multifocal) or Softec-1 (monofocal) IOLs (each n=15) 4-6 months previously were examined. Each reported their dysphotopsia symptoms subjectively, identified its form (EyeVisPod illustrations) and halo perception (Aston Halometer).

Results:

Tecnis ZM900 IOLs demonstrated a uniform increase in dysphotopsia in comparison with the monofocal IOL (p<0.001) as measured with the halometer, whereas SBL-3 sectorial refractive multifocal IOLs demonstrated a localized increase in dysphotopsia over the inferior visual field. There was no significant correlation between the subjective dysphotopsia severity and the halometry (p>0.10) quantification.

Conclusions:

There is a significant difference between halometry for the Tecnis diffractive multifocal lens compared to the segmental multifocal SBL-3.

Financial Disclosure:

One or more of the authors gains financially from product or procedure presented, One or more of the authors travel has been funded, fully or partially, by a competing company, One or more of the authors travel has been funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, One or more of the authors research is funded, fully or partially, by a competing company, One or more of the authors research is funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, One or more of the authors receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a competing company, One or more of the authors receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented

Back to Poster listing