Beijing Institute of Ophthalmology, Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital of Capital Medical University, Beijing Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Beijing, China.
Dana Center for Preventive Ophthalmology, The Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Surv Ophthalmol. 2019 Sep-Oct;64(5):647-658. doi: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2019.02.012. Epub 2019 Mar 6.
We compare multifocal intraocular lenses (MFIOLs) to monofocal IOLs for visual acuity (VA), contrast sensitivity, and adverse events using data from 21 randomized controlled trials with 2951 subjects. There was no statistical difference between uncorrected distance VA and corrected distance VA. Compared with monofocal IOLs, MFIOLs showed a better performance on uncorrected intermediate VA measured at 60 cm and uncorrected near VA; the mean differences were -0.06 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.10, -0.03) and -0.13 (95% CI: -0.20, -0.07). Distance-corrected intermediate VA and distance-corrected near VA were measured wearing distance correction. MFIOLs performed better than monofocal IOLs on distance-corrected intermediate VA at 60 cm and distance-corrected near VA; the mean differences were -0.09 (95% CI: -0.12, -0.06) and -0.31 (95% CI: -0.43, -0.19). The contrast sensitivity of the MFIOL group was lower than that of the monofocal IOL group; mean difference was -0.06 (95% CI: -0.11, -0.02). More patients were spectacle free in the MFIOL group; the risk ratio was 2.86 (95% CI: 1.73, 4.73). More patients were troubled by glare and halos in the MFIOL group; the risk ratios were 1.91 (95% CI: 1.24, 2.95) and 3.08 (95% CI: 2.11, 4.49). We conclude that, compared with monofocal IOLs, MFIOLs give patients better near vision and intermediate vision at 60 cm, both corrected and uncorrected. Patients undergoing MFIOLs implantation are more likely to be spectacle free but have a higher risk of glare, halos, and lower contrast sensitivity.
我们将多焦点人工晶状体(MFIOL)与单焦点人工晶状体进行比较,以评估视力(VA)、对比敏感度和不良事件,使用了 21 项随机对照试验的数据,涉及 2951 名受试者。未矫正远视力和矫正远视力之间无统计学差异。与单焦点 IOL 相比,MFIOL 在未经矫正的 60cm 中间 VA 和未经矫正的近 VA 方面表现更好;平均差异分别为-0.06(95%置信区间[CI]:-0.10,-0.03)和-0.13(95% CI:-0.20,-0.07)。距离矫正中间 VA 和距离矫正近 VA 通过佩戴距离矫正来测量。MFIOL 在 60cm 的距离矫正中间 VA 和距离矫正近 VA 方面优于单焦点 IOL;平均差异分别为-0.09(95% CI:-0.12,-0.06)和-0.31(95% CI:-0.43,-0.19)。MFIOL 组的对比敏感度低于单焦点 IOL 组;平均差异为-0.06(95% CI:-0.11,-0.02)。MFIOL 组中有更多的患者无需戴眼镜;风险比为 2.86(95% CI:1.73,4.73)。MFIOL 组中有更多的患者受到眩光和光晕的困扰;风险比分别为 1.91(95% CI:1.24,2.95)和 3.08(95% CI:2.11,4.49)。我们得出结论,与单焦点 IOL 相比,MFIOL 可使患者获得更好的近视力和 60cm 处的中间视力,无论是矫正还是未矫正。接受 MFIOL 植入的患者更有可能无需戴眼镜,但有更高的眩光、光晕和更低的对比敏感度风险。