Private Practice, Ankara, Türkiye.
Yozgat Bozok University Faculty of Medicine Ophthalmology Department, Yozgat, Türkiye.
Turk J Ophthalmol. 2024 Aug 28;54(4):190-197. doi: 10.4274/tjo.galenos.2024.27805.
It was aimed to compare the clinical results of the mini-monovision technique (MMV) with enhanced monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) and trifocal IOL applications and to evaluate the intereye differences in the MMV group.
This retrospective observational study evaluated the results of cataract surgeries performed on 48 eyes of 24 patients. Surgeries in Group I were performed for MMV using the RayOne EMV IOL targeting emmetropia in dominant eyes (Group IA) and -0.70 diopter (D) myopia in non-dominant eyes (Group IB), while those in Group II were performed with the AcrySof IQ PanOptix TNFT00 IOL targeting emmetropia. After the surgeries, uncorrected and corrected distance, intermediate, and near distance visual acuities, contrast sensitivity measurements, and defocus curves were determined. Subjective evaluation was made with the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25). The groups were compared statistically.
Postoperative refraction mean spherical equivalent was -0.25±0.22 D, -0.67±0.33 D, and -0.16±0.31 D in the three groups, respectively. A statistical difference was identified in favor of Group IA for uncorrected distance vision and in favor of Group IB for near vision (p<0.05). There was no difference in bilateral uncorrected visions in Groups I and II (p>0.05). While contrast sensitivity was better in Group I at all spatial frequencies (p<0.05), better vision was achieved in the defocus curve at distance in Group IA and at near in Group IB. In the binocular evaluation, it was seen that Groups I and II had similar results. In the subjective evaluation, NEI-VFQ-25 scores were 94.1±4.2/100 in Group I and 91.5±3.0/100 in Group II at 6 months (p>0.05). Photic complaints were significantly more common in Group II.
With the MMV technique, it was observed that enhanced monofocal lenses provided better visual acuity at all distances and less dysphotopsia than trifocal lenses, whereas trifocal lenses were better at providing independence from glasses.
比较微单视技术(MMV)与增强型单焦点人工晶状体(IOL)和三焦点 IOL 应用的临床效果,并评估 MMV 组的双眼间差异。
本回顾性观察研究评估了 24 名患者的 48 只眼白内障手术的结果。第 I 组手术采用 RayOne EMV IOL 进行 MMV,旨在使主导眼(IA 组)达到正视,非主导眼(IB 组)达到-0.70 屈光度(D)近视。第 II 组手术采用 AcrySof IQ PanOptix TNFT00 IOL 进行,旨在达到正视。手术后,测量未矫正和矫正远、中、近视力、对比敏感度测量值和离焦曲线。使用国家眼科研究所视觉功能问卷(NEI VFQ-25)进行主观评估。对各组进行统计学比较。
三组术后平均等效球镜度分别为-0.25±0.22 D、-0.67±0.33 D 和-0.16±0.31 D。IA 组在未矫正远视力方面和 IB 组在近视力方面有统计学差异(p<0.05)。第 I 组和第 II 组双眼未矫正视力无差异(p>0.05)。在所有空间频率下,第 I 组的对比敏感度更好(p<0.05),但在离焦曲线中,IA 组在远距视力更好,IB 组在近距视力更好。在双眼评估中,发现第 I 组和第 II 组的结果相似。在主观评估中,第 I 组和第 II 组在 6 个月时的 NEI-VFQ-25 评分分别为 94.1±4.2/100 和 91.5±3.0/100(p>0.05)。光幻视症状在第 II 组中更为常见。
通过 MMV 技术,与三焦点 IOL 相比,增强型单焦点 IOL 在所有距离上提供更好的视力和更少的光觉不适,而三焦点 IOL 更能提供对眼镜的依赖。