Visual quality after diffractive intraocular lens implantation in eyes with previous myopic laser in situ keratomileusis.

PURPOSE

To evaluate distance, intermediate, and near visual quality in eyes having diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) implantation after previous myopic laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

SETTING

Fernández-Vega Ophthalmological Institute, Oviedo, Spain.

METHODS

Best corrected distance visual acuity at 12.5%, 25%, and 100% contrasts under photopic and mesopic conditions, best distance-corrected near visual acuity, defocus curve, and corneal higher-order aberrations (HOAs) were measured in eyes with a spherical AcrySof ReSTOR SNA60D3 IOL or aspherical Acri.LISA 366D IOL after myopic LASIK and in phakic eyes after myopic LASIK (control group).

RESULTS

Under photopic conditions at 100% contrast, best corrected distance acuity was 0.1 logMAR or better in all groups. At 25% and 12.5%, there were no statistically significant differences between the Acri.LISA and AcrySof ReSTOR groups or the Acri.LISA and control groups (P >.01). The control group had better best corrected distance acuity than the AcrySof ReSTOR group (P = .0002 and P < .0001 at 25% and 12.5%, respectively). Under mesopic conditions, the Acri.LISA group had better best corrected distance acuity than the AcrySof ReSTOR group at all contrasts (P > .01). The best distance-corrected near acuity was comparable in the 2 IOL groups (P < .01). Intermediate visual acuity was statistically significantly better in the Acri.LISA group than in the AcrySof ReSTOR group (P < .01). There were no statistically significant differences in HOAs between the 3 groups (P > .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Both multifocal IOLs provided good and comparable visual acuity at distance and near. However, the aspherical Acri.LISA IOL gave better intermediate visual acuity than the spherical AcrySof ReSTOR IOL.