• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

五焦点与三焦点衍射型人工晶状体的客观与主观视觉效果比较。

Comparison of Objective and Subjective Visual Outcomes Between Pentafocal and Trifocal Diffractive Intraocular Lenses.

出版信息

J Refract Surg. 2024 Sep;40(9):e604-e613. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20240715-04. Epub 2024 Sep 1.

DOI:10.3928/1081597X-20240715-04
PMID:39254241
Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical and aberrometric outcomes obtained with a new diffractive pentafocal intraocular lens (IOL) and a diffractive trifocal IOL.

METHODS

Patients bilaterally implanted with the pentafocal Intensity SeeLens IOL (Hanita Lenses) (n = 30) and the trifocal FineVision POD F IOL (PhysIOL) (n = 30) during cataract surgery were studied after 1 month for refraction, visual acuity, defocus curve, contrast sensitivity, Hartmann-Shack aberration, and double-pass aberration. The Quality of Vision (QoV) questionnaire was used to evaluate visual comfort.

RESULTS

Distance and near visual acuities were similar with the two IOLs, but distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity was better with the Intensity IOLs (0.03 ± 0.04 vs 0.11 ± 0.04 logMAR in the FineVision eyes, < .01). The difference between objective and subjective refraction was more myopic for the Intensity IOL (-1.15 vs -0.29 diopters [D]). The defocus curve was flatter with the Intensity IOL. Contrast sensitivity was similar in both IOLs. Hartmann-Shack aberration and double-pass aberration were similar, but the modulation transfer function cut-off value was worse with the Intensity IOL: 11.6 ± 2.7 vs 15.3 ± 4.9 ( < .01). QoV scores were better with the Intensity IOL, in particular for glare, halos, and starburst.

CONCLUSIONS

In this comparative series, the pentafocal Intensity IOL provided better intermediate vision and better defocus curve than the FineVision IOL, with comparable distance and near vision. The optical disturbances as reported by the patients were higher with the FineVision IOL. Additional studies will better define the aberration profile obtained with the pentafocal IOL. .

摘要

目的

比较新型衍射五焦点人工晶状体(IOL)和衍射三焦点 IOL 的临床和像差结果。

方法

在白内障手术中,双侧植入 Pentafocal Intensity SeeLens IOL(Hanita Lenses)(n = 30)和 FineVision POD F IOL(PhysIOL)(n = 30)的患者,在术后 1 个月进行屈光度、视力、离焦曲线、对比敏感度、哈特曼-夏克像差和双光像差检查。使用视觉质量(QoV)问卷评估视觉舒适度。

结果

两种 IOL 的远、近视力相似,但 Intensity IOL 的距离校正中间视力更好(FineVision 眼为 0.03 ± 0.04 vs 0.11 ± 0.04 logMAR,<.01)。Intensity IOL 的客观和主观屈光度差异更近视(-1.15 与 -0.29 屈光度[D])。Intensity IOL 的离焦曲线更平坦。两种 IOL 的对比敏感度相似。哈特曼-夏克像差和双光像差相似,但调制传递函数截止值较差(11.6 ± 2.7 与 15.3 ± 4.9,<.01)。Intensity IOL 的 QoV 评分更好,特别是在眩光、晕影和星爆方面。

结论

在这项比较系列研究中,Pentafocal Intensity IOL 提供了比 FineVision IOL 更好的中间视力和更好的离焦曲线,同时具有相当的远、近视力。患者报告的光学干扰更多的是 FineVision IOL。进一步的研究将更好地定义 Pentafocal IOL 获得的像差特征。

相似文献

1
Comparison of Objective and Subjective Visual Outcomes Between Pentafocal and Trifocal Diffractive Intraocular Lenses.五焦点与三焦点衍射型人工晶状体的客观与主观视觉效果比较。
J Refract Surg. 2024 Sep;40(9):e604-e613. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20240715-04. Epub 2024 Sep 1.
2
Stability of a Novel Intraocular Lens Design: Comparison of Two Trifocal Lenses.一种新型人工晶状体设计的稳定性:两种三焦点晶状体的比较。
J Refract Surg. 2016 Jun 1;32(6):394-402. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20160428-04.
3
Long-term results of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens: Visual, aberrometric and patient satisfaction results.衍射型三焦点人工晶状体的长期效果:视觉、像差及患者满意度结果
Eur J Ophthalmol. 2020 Jan;30(1):201-208. doi: 10.1177/1120672118818019. Epub 2018 Dec 17.
4
Comparative analysis of the visual performance after cataract surgery with implantation of a bifocal or trifocal diffractive IOL.白内障手术后植入双焦点或三焦点衍射型人工晶状体视觉性能的比较分析。
J Refract Surg. 2014 Oct;30(10):666-72. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20140903-06.
5
A Comparative Evaluation of a New Generation of Diffractive Trifocal and Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses.新一代衍射三焦点和扩展焦深人工晶状体的比较评估
J Refract Surg. 2018 Aug 1;34(8):507-514. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20180530-02.
6
Prospective Comparison of Clinical Performance and Subjective Outcomes Between Two Diffractive Trifocal Intraocular Lenses in Bilateral Cataract Surgery.两种衍射型三焦点人工晶状体在双侧白内障手术中临床效果和主观疗效的前瞻性比较。
J Refract Surg. 2019 Jul 1;35(7):418-425. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20190528-02.
7
Visual outcome and optical quality after implantation of zonal refractive multifocal and extended-range-of-vision IOLs: a prospective comparison.植入区域折射多焦点和扩展远视力人工晶状体后的视觉效果和光学质量:前瞻性比较。
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2020 Apr;46(4):540-548. doi: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000088.
8
Implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens: one-year follow-up.衍射型三焦点人工晶状体植入术:一年随访
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015 Aug;41(8):1623-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.11.050.
9
Comparison of a trifocal intraocular lens with a +3.0 D bifocal IOL: results of a prospective randomized clinical trial.三焦点人工晶状体与 +3.0 D 双焦点人工晶状体的比较:一项前瞻性随机临床试验的结果
J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015 Aug;41(8):1631-40. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.08.011.
10
Comparison Between Mix-and-Match Implantation of Bifocal Intraocular Lenses and Bilateral Implantation of Trifocal Intraocular Lenses.双焦点人工晶状体混合植入与三焦点人工晶状体双侧植入的比较
J Refract Surg. 2016 Oct 1;32(10):659-663. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20160630-01.

引用本文的文献

1
Efficacy, safety, and satisfaction in patients with a functional 5-focus pseudophakic lens 2 years after surgery.功能性五焦点人工晶状体植入术后2年患者的疗效、安全性及满意度
Ther Adv Ophthalmol. 2025 May 16;17:25158414251340555. doi: 10.1177/25158414251340555. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.