|
 |
 |
|
Visual Quality with the ReSTOR IOL (model SA60D3): *Fei Yuan, MD, #Yuyi You, MD, *Lei Li, MD, #Xiuping Chen, MD, #Liyang Wang, MD *Department of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, China Financial Interest: The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article. Purpose: To evaluate visual quality following AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive multifocal intraocular lens (model SA60D3) implantation. Setting: Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, China. Methods: Following phacoemulsification, ReSTOR multifocal IOLs were implanted in 17 eyes of 13 patients and monofocal IOLs were implanted in 20 eyes of 14 patients. The two groups had comparable distributions of age, gender, and ocular findings. The main outcome measures included modulation transfer function (MTF), contrast sensitivity (CS), uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA), and wavefront aberration. Results: When the pupil size was small (2.0 or 2.5 mm), the MTF of the monofocal IOL was better than that of ReSTOR at all spatial frequencies. At a pupil size of 3.0 mm, the MTF of the monofocal IOL was better at lower to medium spatial frequencies. When pupil size was larger (3.5 to 4.0 mm), no significant differences were found between the two groups. The monofocal IOL had a slightly better BCVA (1.082 ± 0.183) than ReSTOR (0.941 ± 0.118). The DCNVA was markedly better in the ReSTOR group (0.629 ± 0.217), and 76.47% ReSTOR patients achieved a near visual acuity of J3 or better (P=0.000). No significant differences were observed in the CS or wavefront aberration. Conlusions: ReSTOR provides a satisfactory vision, both in near and in distance, and is a better choice than the monofocal IOL. However, ReSTOR does have a lower MTF when pupil size is small. Keywords: lens, intraocular, multifocal; modulation transfer function; contrast sensitivity. |
 |