A prospective, randomized, double-masked, clinical trial was designed to evaluate distance and near contrast sensitivity (CS) in patients symmetrically, and randomly, implanted with 4 different multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) designs (ReSTOR SN6AD1, ReSTOR SN60D3, ReZoom NXG, and Tecnis ZMA00) and a monofocal control group (Tecnis ZA9003), 6 months after cataract intervention.
Methods
Photopic, mesopic, and mesopic with glare distance CS, as well as photopic near CS, was evaluated with the CSV-1000 CS test and the Vistech VCTS 6000 system, respectively, in a group of 180 patients attending the ophthalmology department of Sant Pau Hospital, Barcelona, for cataract intervention and lens implantation.
Results
Statistically and clinically significant differences were found between the monofocal and multifocal lens groups at all spatial frequencies and illumination conditions, both during distance and near CS evaluation (all p<0.05), with the monofocal lens offering the best performance in all cases. Contrast sensitivity was similarly compromised in all MIOL models at distance, although MIOLs with diffractive optics and aspheric profiles showed a non–statistically significant trend to perform better in mesopic conditions. Near CS was lower for refractive, distance dominant lens designs, particularly at medium to high spatial frequencies.
Conclusions
The present results, which reflect intraocular lens (IOL) characteristics in optics, profile, and add power, may contribute to help surgeons decide on the type of IOL most suitable for each patient by taking into consideration the individual needs for critical distance and near vision, both in terms of visual acuity and contrast sensitivity.
Optic Neuritis Study Group.Visual function 15 years after optic neuritis: a final follow-up report from the Optic Neuritis Treatment Trial.Ophthalmology2008; 115: 1079–82.
4.
KimC.Y., ChungS-H, KimT.I., ChoY.J., YoonG., SeoK.Y.. Comparison of higher-order aberration and contrast sensitivity in monofocal and multifocal intraocular lenses.Yonsei Med J2007; 48: 627–33.
5.
HayashiK., ManabeS., HayashiH.. Visual acuity from far to near and contrast sensitivity in eyes with a diffractive multifocal intraocular lens with a low addition power.J Cataract Refract Surg2009; 35: 2070–6.
6.
Montés-MicóR., EspañaE., BuenoI., CharmanW.N., MenezoJ.L.. Visual performance with multifocal intraocular lenses. Mesopic contrast sensitivity under distance and near conditions.Ophthalmology2004; 111: 85–96.
7.
Montés-MicóR., AlióJ.L.. Distance and near contrast sensitivity function after multifocal intraocular lens implantation.J Cataract Refract Surg2003; 29: 703–11.
8.
Martínez PalmerA., Gómez FaiñaP., España AlbeldaA., Comas SerranoM., Nahra SaadD., Castilla CéspedesM.. Visual function with bilateral implantation of monofocal and multifocal intraocular lenses: a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial.J Refract Surg2008; 24: 257–64.
9.
Fernández-VegaL., AlfonsoJ.F., BaamondeM.B., Montés-MicóR.. Symmetric bilateral implantation of a distance-dominant diffractive bifocal intraocular lens.J Cataract Refract Surg2007; 33: 1913–7.
10.
SenH.N., SarikkolaA.U., UusitaloR.J., LaatikainenL.. Quality of vision after AMO Array multifocal intraocular lens implantation.J Cataract Refract Surg2004; 30: 2483–93.
AlfonsoJ.F., Fernández-VegaL., BaamondeM.B., Montés-MicóR.. Correlation of pupil size with visual acuity and contrast sensitivity after implantation of an apodized diffractive intraocular lens.J Cataract Refract Surg2007; 33: 430–8.
13.
GilM.A., VaronC., RoselloN., CardonaG., BuilJ.A.. Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, subjective quality of vision, and quality of life with 4 different multifocal IOLs.Eur J Ophthalmol2012; 22: 175–87.
14.
AlfonsoJ.F., Fernández-VegaL., BlázquezJ.I., Montés-MicóR.. Visual function comparison of 2 aspheric multifocal intraocular lenses.J Cataract Refract Surg2012; 38: 242–8.
15.
PanditaD., RajS.M., VasavadaV.A., VasavadaV.A., KaziN.S., VasavadaA.R.. Contrast sensitivity and glare disability after implantation of AcrySof IQ Natural aspherical intraocular lens: prospective randomized masked clinical trial.J Cataract Refract Surg2007; 33: 603–10.
16.
MesciC., ErbilH., OzdokerL., KarakurtY., BilgeA.D.. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity function after accommodative and multifocal intraocular lens implantation.Eur J Ophthalmol2010; 20: 90–100.
17.
MesterU., HunoldW., WesendahlT., KaymakH.. Functional outcomes after implantation of Tecnis ZM900 and Array SA40 multifocal intraocular lenses.J Cataract Refract Surg2007; 33: 1033–40.
18.
SasakiA.. Initial experience with a refractive multifocal intraocular lens in a Japanese population.J Cataract Refract Surg2000; 26: 1001–7.
DenoyerA., Le LezM.L., MajzoubS., PisellaP.J.. Quality of vision after cataract surgery after Tecnis Z9000 intraocular lens implantation: effect of contrast sensitivity and wavefront aberration improvements on the quality of daily vision.J Cataract Refract Surg2007; 33: 210–6.
21.
PackerM., FineI.H., HoffmanR.S., PiersP.A.. Improved functional vision with a modified prolate intraocular lens.J Cataract Refract Surg2004; 30: 986–92.
22.
DavisonJ.A., SimpsonM.J.. History and development of the apodized diffractive intraocular lens.J Cataract Refract Surg2006; 32: 849–58.
23.
BellucciR., ScialdoneA., BurattoL.. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity comparison between Tecnis and AcrySof SA60AT intraocular lenses: A multicenter randomized study.J Cataract Refract Surg2005; 31: 712–7.
ElliottD.B., BullimoreM.A., PatlaA.E., WhitakerD.. Effect of a cataract simulation on clinical and real world vision.Br J Ophthalmol1996; 80: 799–804.
26.
de VriesN.E., NuijtsRMMA. Multifocal intraocular lenses in cataract surgery: literature review of benefits and side effects.J Cataract Refract Surg2013; 39: 268–78.
27.
CampbellF.W., GreenD.G.. Monocular versus binocular visual acuity.Nature1965; 208: 191–2.
28.
SouzaC.E., MuccioliC., SorianoE.S.. Visual performance of AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive IOL: a prospective comparative trial.Am J Ophthalmol2006; 141: 827–32.
29.
RochaK.M., ChalitaM.R., SouzaC.E.. Postoperative wavefront analysis and contrast sensitivity of a multifocal apodized diffractive IOL (ReSTOR) and three monofocal IOLs.J Refract Surg2005; 21: S808–12.
30.
LeylandM., ZinicolaE.. Multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses in cataract surgery. A systematic review.Ophthalmology2003; 110: 1789–98.
31.
AlióJ.L., PiñeroD.P., Plaza-PucheA.B., ChanM.J.. Visual outcomes and optical performance of a monofocal intraocular lens and a new-generation multifocal intraocular lens.J Cataract Refract Surg2011; 37: 241–50.
32.
RochaK.M., SorianoE.S., ChalitaM.R.. Wavefront analysis and contrast sensitivity of aspheric and spherical intraocular lenses: a randomized prospective study.Am J Ophthalmol2006; 142: 750–6.
33.
MesterU., DillingerP., AnteristN.. Impact of a modified optic design on visual function: clinical comparative study.J Cataract Refract Surg2003; 29: 652–60.
34.
TzelikisP.F., AkaishiL., TrindadeF.C., BoteonJ.E.. Spherical aberration and contrast sensitivity in eyes implanted with aspheric and spherical intraocular lenses: a comparative study.Am J Ophthalmol2008; 145: 827–33.
35.
Montés-MicóR., Ferrer-BlascoT., CerviñoA.. Analysis of the possible benefits of aspheric intraocular lenses: review of the literature.J Cataract Refract Surg2009; 35: 172–81.
36.
Montés-MicóR., CharmanW.N.. Choice of spatial frequency for contrast sensitivity evaluation after corneal refractive surgery.J Refract Surg2001; 17: 646–51.
