J Korean Ophthalmol Soc.  2013 Aug;54(8):1213-1218.

Comparisons of Clinical Results after Implantation of Three Aspheric Intraocular Lenses

• Lee K
• Yoon MH
• Seo KY
• Kim EK
• Kim TI

Abstract

PURPOSE
To compare the clinical 3 months postoperative results of three different 1-piece aspheric intraocular lenses (IOLs): AcrySof IQ SN60WF (Alcon Laboratories, INC, Fort Worth, TX), TECNIS 1-piece ZCB00 (AMO Inc., Santa Ana, CA) and the newly developed enVista MX60 (Bausch & Lomb, Rochester, NY).
METHODS
In a total of 62 eyes, 1 of the 3 1-piece aspheric IOLs, AcrySof IQ SN60WF, TECNIS 1-piece ZCB00 or enVista MX60 was implanted after cataract extraction. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), and spherical equivalent were assessed 3 months postoperatively. Total spherical aberration, high order aberration, and modulation transfer function were analyzed.
RESULTS
There were no significant differences of UCVA, BCVA, the accuracy of postoperative refractive power, and modulation transfer function among the 3 IOLs. Higher order aberrations of the entire eye and internal optics showed almost no significant differences.
CONCLUSIONS
The newly developed IOL, enVista MX60, showed equivalent clinical outcomes as both AcrySof IQ SN60WF and TECNIS 1-piece ZCB00.

Keyword

Aspheric intraocular lens; Spherical aberration

MeSH Terms

Cataract Extraction
Eye
Lenses, Intraocular
Visual Acuity

Figure

• 

  Figure 1. Modulation transfer function (MTF) of 3 groups at 5-mm pupil zone. (A) Modulation transfer function (MTF) of total eye. * p-value = no statistical difference between 3 intraocular lens groups. (B) Modulation transfer function (MTF) of Internal optics. * p-value = no statistical difference between 3 intraocular lens groups.

Reference

References

1. Brint SF, Ostrick DM, Bryan JE. Keratometric cylinder and visual performance following phacoemulsification and implantation with silicone small-incision or poly(methyl methacrylate) intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1991; 17:32–6.

2. Levy JH, Pisacano AM, Chadwick K. Astigmatic changes after cataract surgery with 5.1 mm and 3.5 mm sutureless incisions. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1994; 20:630–3.

3. Menapace R, Radax U, Amon M, Papapanos P. No-stitch, small in-cision cataract surgery with flexible intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1994; 20:534–42.

4. Oshika T, Yoshimura K, Miyata N. Postsurgical inflammation after phacoemulsification and extracapsular extraction with soft or con-ventional intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1992; 18:356–61.

5. Apple DJ. Intraocular lenses: Evolution, Design, Complications, and Pathology. Boltimore: Willams & Wilkins;1989; 11–41.

6. Alcon Laboratory I AcrySof natural single-piece IOL product monograph. For Worth, TX. 2003.

7. Ursell PG, Spalton DJ, Pande MV. Anterior capsule stability in eyes with intraocular lenses made of poly(methyl methacrylate), silicone, and AcrySof. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1997; 23:1532–8.

8. Nagata T, Minakata A, Watanabe I. Adhesiveness of AcrySof to a collagen film. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1998; 24:367–70.

9. Gabriel MM, Ahearn DG, Chan KY, Patel AS. In vitro adherence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa to four intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1998; 24:124–9.

10. Christiansen G, Durcan FJ, Olson RJ, Christiansen K. Glistenings in the AcrySof intraocular lens: pilot study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001; 27:728–33.

11. Dogru M, Tetsumoto K, Tagami Y. . Optical and atomic force microscopy of an explanted AcrySof intraocular lens with glistenings. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000; 26:571–5.

12. Omar O, Pirayesh A, Mamalis N, Olson RJ. In vitro analysis of AcrySof intraocular lens glistenings in AcryPak and Wagon Wheel packaging. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1998; 24:107–13.

13. Kato K, Nishida M, Yamane H. . Glistening formation in an AcrySof lens initiated by spinodal decomposition of the polymer network by temperature change. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001; 27:1493–8.

14. Dhaliwal DK, Mamalis N, Olson RJ. . Visual significance of glistenings seen in the AcrySof intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1996; 22:452–7.

15. Oshika T, Shiokawa Y, Amano S, Mitomo K. Influence of glistenings on the optical quality of acrylic foldable intraocular lens. Br J Ophthalmol. 2001; 85:1034–7.

16. Caporossi A, Martone G, Casprini F, Rapisarda L. Prospective randomized study of clinical performance of 3 aspheric and 2 spherical intraocular lenses in 250 eyes. J Refract Surg. 2007; 23:639–48.

17. Rocha KM, Soriano ES, Chalita MR. . Wavefront analysis and contrast sensitivity of aspheric and spherical intraocular lenses: a randomized prospective study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006; 142:750–6.

18. Tzelikis PF, Akaishi L, Trindade FC, Boteon JE. Spherical aberration and contrast sensitivity in eyes implanted with aspheric and spherical intraocular lenses: a comparative study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008; 145:827–33.

19. Ahn H, Kim SW, Kim EK, Kim TI. Wavefront and visual function analysis after aspherical and spherical intraocular lenses implantation. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2008; 49:1248–55.

20. Kim HS, Kim SW, Ha BJ. . Ocular aberrations and contrast sensitivity in eyes implanted with aspheric and spherical intra-ocular lenses. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2008; 49:1256–62.

21. Oshika T, Kawana K, Hiraoka T. . Ocular higher-order wave-front aberration caused by major tilting of intraocular lens. Am JOphthalmol. 2005; 140:744–6.

22. Marcos S, Barbero S, Jiménez-Alfaro I. Optical quality and depth-of-field of eyes implanted with spherical and aspheric intra-ocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005; 21:223–35.