- Vienna 2018
- Athens 2019
- ESCRS Player
- On Demand
- ESCRS iLearn
- ESCRS YO's
First Author: K.Gundersen NORWAY
Co Author(s): R. Potvin
Back to previous
To compare near, intermediate and distance vision, and quality of vision, when monofocal or apodized diffractive multifocal IOLs are binocularly implanted.
Single ophthalmology clinic.
Patients with different binocular IOLs implanted were recruited after surgery and had their visual acuity tested, and quality of vision evaluated, at a single diagnostic visit between 3 and 8 months after second-eye surgery. Lenses tested included an aspheric monofocal and two apodized diffractive multifocal IOLs with slightly different design parameters.
Subjects with the ReSTOR® +2.5 IOL had better near and intermediate vision than those subjects with a monofocal IOL. Intermediate vision was similar to, and near vision slightly lower than, that of subjects with a ReSTOR® +3.0 IOL implanted. The preferred reading distance was slightly farther out for the +2.5 relative to the +3.0 lens, and farthest for the monofocal. Visual acuity at the preferred reading distance was equal with the two multifocals and significantly worse with the monofocal IOL. Quality of vision measures were highest with the monofocal IOL and similar between the two multifocal IOLs.
The data indicate that the ReSTOR +2.5 IOL provided good intermediate and functional near vision for patients who did not want to accept a higher potential for visual disturbances associated with the ReSTOR +3.0 IOL, but wanted more near vision than a monofocal IOL generally provides.