ABSTRACT
RESUMEN La tecnología de los lentes intraoculares se desarrolla constantemente, por las necesidades visuales cada vez mayores de los pacientes después de operados de catarata; de ahí que nos propusimos realizar una búsqueda acerca de los diferentes modelos de lentes, como los monofocales, los bifocales, los trifocales, los trifocales tóricos y los de foco extendido. Esta nueva tecnología exige exámenes preoperatorios cada vez de más calidad y precisión, para que los resultados quirúrgicos respondan al concepto de cirugía refractiva del cristalino, por lo que concluimos que en el futuro la tecnología de las lentes intraoculares debe estar encaminada a recuperar la visión funcional. En este sentido, cada uno tiene puntos fuertes y débiles; por lo tanto, no hay una solución universal. Se debe crear un reporte de las ventajas y desventajas para trabajar en los puntos a mejorar, sobre todo en la estandarización de la curva de desenfoque, el modulation transfer function y la sensibilidad al contraste, así como trabajar conjuntamente entre los pacientes, cirujanos y fabricantes(AU)
ABSTRACT Intraocular lens technology is in a process of permanent development, due to the increasing visual needs of patients undergoing cataract surgery. That is why we set out to do a search about the different lens models of lenses are offered, including the monofocal, bifocal, trifocal, toric trifocal and extended focus types. This new technology requires rigorous and accurate preoperative tests, so that surgical results respond to the concept of refractive crystalline lens surgery. We therefore conclude that future intraocular lens technology should be aimed at recovering functional vision. Each of the lens types has its own strengths and weaknesses, and so a universal solution does not exist. A report should be developed of advantages and disadvantages, so that work can be done on aspects requiring improvement, mainly the standardization of the improper focusing curve, the modulation transfer function and contrast sensitivity, as well as the implementation of actions to be performed jointly by patients, surgeons and manufacturers(AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Cataract Extraction/methods , Phacoemulsification , Reference Standards , Multifocal Intraocular Lenses/adverse effectsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To review refractive, visual acuity, defocus curve and contrast sensitivity results after bilateral implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) in a large population. SETTING: One site in Santiago, Chile. DESIGN: Single arm, non-randomized retrospective chart review. METHODS: This was a single-arm retrospective chart review of clinical outcomes after bilateral implantation of a trifocal IOL (Panoptix®), both toric and non-toric versions. Binocular visual acuity at 4 m, 60 cm and 40 cm was tested. Other tests included refraction, mesopic and photopic contrast sensitivity, and defocus curve measurement. RESULTS: The review included 500 eyes of 250 patients implanted with the trifocal IOL and 200 eyes of 100 patients implanted with the trifocal toric IOL, with no clinically significant differences between groups. Ninety-six percent of all eyes were within 0.50D of the intended spherical equivalent correction. In the toric group, 94% of eyes (187/200) had a residual refractive cylinder ≤0.50D, compared to 81% of eyes (406/500) in the non-toric group. Four out of five patients (80.6%, 282/350) had a binocular uncorrected VA of 0.1 logMAR (20/25) at all test distances. Mean defocus was 0.1 logMAR or better from vergences from 0.00 to -3.00 D (corresponding to vision from distance to about 33 cm). With a cutoff of 0.2 logMAR, 96% of patients had a range of vision 2.5 D or greater. Contrast sensitivity was similar between the toric and non-toric lenses, and similar to age-matched normal results. CONCLUSION: The non-toric and toric trifocal IOLs provided good distance, intermediate and near vision to patients, with a wide range of vision and good contrast sensitivity.