Milan 2012 Programme Registration Exhibition Hotels Exhibitor Listing Satellite Meetings Visa Information
Search Abstracts by author or title
(results will display both Free Papers & Poster)

One-year comparison of silicone and hydrophobic acrylic multifocal intraocular lenses with same diffractive design

Poster Details

First Author: K.Minami JAPAN

Co Author(s):    R. Nonaka   M. Yoshino   H. Bissen MIyajima        

Abstract Details


To compare visual outcomes of two multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with the same diffractive design during 1 year follow-up.


Tokyo Dental Collage Suidobashi Hospital, Tokyo, Japan


Nineteen patients (mean age: 60.0 ± 8.0 years) underwent bilateral cataract surgery, following implantation of a silicone multifocal IOL (ZM900, Abbott Medical Optics) manufactured with mold casting in one eye and a hydrophobic acrylic IOL (ZMA00, Abbott Medical Optics) with lathe-cutting in the fellow eye. Uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuities (UDVA and CDVA) at 5 m, uncorrected, distance-corrected, and corrected near visual acuities (UNVA, DCNVA, and CNVA) at 30 cm, and contrast sensitivity (CSV-1000, Vector Vision) were measured at 1, 3, 12 months postoperatively. Incidence of posterior capsular opacification (PCO) was assessed. Visual acuities and contrast sensitivity were compared between the two IOLs using Wilcoxon signed-rank test.


Mean UDVA and CDVA at 12 months were -0.06 and -0.13 logMAR in the silicone eyes and -0.03 and -0.03 and -0.11 logMAR in the acrylic eyes, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two IOLs (P=0.17, 0.21). UNVA, DCNVA, and CNVA in the silicone eyes (0.14, 0.07, and -0.05 logMAR) were significantly better than those in the acrylic eyes (0.20, 0.14, and 0.02 logMAR) (P<0.01). No significant difference was observed in contrast sensitivity (P>0.47). One eye with the acrylic lens received Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy at 5 months postoperatively.


During one-year follow-up, the silicone multifocal IOL provided better near visual acuities than the hydrophobic acrylic IOL. Decrease in near visual acuity could be caused by differences in edge configuration and/or manufacturing of the diffractive optics. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE?: ... receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a competing company

Back to previous

loading Please wait while information is loading.