Does the apodized diffractive intraocular lens Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM interfere with FDT Matrix perimetry results?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2009 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27492009000600003 |
Resumo: | PURPOSE: To compare the effect of an apodized diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) (Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM) and its yellow counterpart (Natural IQ TM) on frequency doubling technology (FDT) perimetry results. METHODS: This study included 37 eyes from 22 patients at the "Centro Oftalmológico Tranjan" who had undergone uncomplicated phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation (17 Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM, 20 Natural IQ TM) performed by the same surgeon, at least three months prior to the study. Patients were subject to frequency doubling technology Matrix Perimeter testing. RESULTS: The patients were between 41 to 79 years old (mean, 70.78 ± 9.83) in the Natural IQ TM and 49 to 81 years old (mean, 67.11± 11.48) in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group, and the mean IOP was 13.64 ± 2.02 mmHg in the Natural IQ TM 12.94 ± 1.39 mmHg in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group. The mean pupillary diameter under scotopic conditions was 6.63 ± 1.16 mm in the Natural IQ TM group and 7.20 ± 1.8 mm in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group (p=0.20). The mean deviation was -1.83 ± 3.46 dB in the Natural IQ TM group and -1.77 ± 3.94 dB in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group (p=0.28). The pattern standard deviation was 3.49 ± 0.79 dB in the Natural IQ TM group and 3.20 ± 0.86 dB in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group (p=0.27). CONCLUSION: There was no difference in the results of FDT Matrix perimetry in eyes that received apodized diffractive IOLs implant or eyes that received monofocal intraocular lens implant. |
id |
CBO-2_6d3ca32fbcde443a2b58b9b289454687 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0004-27492009000600003 |
network_acronym_str |
CBO-2 |
network_name_str |
Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Does the apodized diffractive intraocular lens Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM interfere with FDT Matrix perimetry results?CataractLenses, intraocularPerimetryGlaucomaLens implantation, intraocularContrast sensibilityPhacoemulsificationPURPOSE: To compare the effect of an apodized diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) (Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM) and its yellow counterpart (Natural IQ TM) on frequency doubling technology (FDT) perimetry results. METHODS: This study included 37 eyes from 22 patients at the "Centro Oftalmológico Tranjan" who had undergone uncomplicated phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation (17 Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM, 20 Natural IQ TM) performed by the same surgeon, at least three months prior to the study. Patients were subject to frequency doubling technology Matrix Perimeter testing. RESULTS: The patients were between 41 to 79 years old (mean, 70.78 ± 9.83) in the Natural IQ TM and 49 to 81 years old (mean, 67.11± 11.48) in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group, and the mean IOP was 13.64 ± 2.02 mmHg in the Natural IQ TM 12.94 ± 1.39 mmHg in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group. The mean pupillary diameter under scotopic conditions was 6.63 ± 1.16 mm in the Natural IQ TM group and 7.20 ± 1.8 mm in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group (p=0.20). The mean deviation was -1.83 ± 3.46 dB in the Natural IQ TM group and -1.77 ± 3.94 dB in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group (p=0.28). The pattern standard deviation was 3.49 ± 0.79 dB in the Natural IQ TM group and 3.20 ± 0.86 dB in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group (p=0.27). CONCLUSION: There was no difference in the results of FDT Matrix perimetry in eyes that received apodized diffractive IOLs implant or eyes that received monofocal intraocular lens implant.Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia2009-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27492009000600003Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia v.72 n.6 2009reponame:Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online)instname:Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO)instacron:CBO10.1590/S0004-27492009000600003info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBojikian,Karine DuarteVita,João BrasilForno,Catia Potira DalTranjan Neto,AlfredoMoura,Christiane Rolim deeng2010-01-19T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0004-27492009000600003Revistahttp://aboonline.org.br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpaboonline@cbo.com.br||abo@cbo.com.br1678-29250004-2749opendoar:2010-01-19T00:00Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online) - Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Does the apodized diffractive intraocular lens Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM interfere with FDT Matrix perimetry results? |
title |
Does the apodized diffractive intraocular lens Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM interfere with FDT Matrix perimetry results? |
spellingShingle |
Does the apodized diffractive intraocular lens Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM interfere with FDT Matrix perimetry results? Bojikian,Karine Duarte Cataract Lenses, intraocular Perimetry Glaucoma Lens implantation, intraocular Contrast sensibility Phacoemulsification |
title_short |
Does the apodized diffractive intraocular lens Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM interfere with FDT Matrix perimetry results? |
title_full |
Does the apodized diffractive intraocular lens Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM interfere with FDT Matrix perimetry results? |
title_fullStr |
Does the apodized diffractive intraocular lens Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM interfere with FDT Matrix perimetry results? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Does the apodized diffractive intraocular lens Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM interfere with FDT Matrix perimetry results? |
title_sort |
Does the apodized diffractive intraocular lens Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM interfere with FDT Matrix perimetry results? |
author |
Bojikian,Karine Duarte |
author_facet |
Bojikian,Karine Duarte Vita,João Brasil Forno,Catia Potira Dal Tranjan Neto,Alfredo Moura,Christiane Rolim de |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Vita,João Brasil Forno,Catia Potira Dal Tranjan Neto,Alfredo Moura,Christiane Rolim de |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Bojikian,Karine Duarte Vita,João Brasil Forno,Catia Potira Dal Tranjan Neto,Alfredo Moura,Christiane Rolim de |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Cataract Lenses, intraocular Perimetry Glaucoma Lens implantation, intraocular Contrast sensibility Phacoemulsification |
topic |
Cataract Lenses, intraocular Perimetry Glaucoma Lens implantation, intraocular Contrast sensibility Phacoemulsification |
description |
PURPOSE: To compare the effect of an apodized diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) (Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM) and its yellow counterpart (Natural IQ TM) on frequency doubling technology (FDT) perimetry results. METHODS: This study included 37 eyes from 22 patients at the "Centro Oftalmológico Tranjan" who had undergone uncomplicated phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation (17 Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM, 20 Natural IQ TM) performed by the same surgeon, at least three months prior to the study. Patients were subject to frequency doubling technology Matrix Perimeter testing. RESULTS: The patients were between 41 to 79 years old (mean, 70.78 ± 9.83) in the Natural IQ TM and 49 to 81 years old (mean, 67.11± 11.48) in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group, and the mean IOP was 13.64 ± 2.02 mmHg in the Natural IQ TM 12.94 ± 1.39 mmHg in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group. The mean pupillary diameter under scotopic conditions was 6.63 ± 1.16 mm in the Natural IQ TM group and 7.20 ± 1.8 mm in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group (p=0.20). The mean deviation was -1.83 ± 3.46 dB in the Natural IQ TM group and -1.77 ± 3.94 dB in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group (p=0.28). The pattern standard deviation was 3.49 ± 0.79 dB in the Natural IQ TM group and 3.20 ± 0.86 dB in the Acrysof ReSTOR NaturalTM group (p=0.27). CONCLUSION: There was no difference in the results of FDT Matrix perimetry in eyes that received apodized diffractive IOLs implant or eyes that received monofocal intraocular lens implant. |
publishDate |
2009 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2009-12-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27492009000600003 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-27492009000600003 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/S0004-27492009000600003 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia v.72 n.6 2009 reponame:Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online) instname:Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO) instacron:CBO |
instname_str |
Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO) |
instacron_str |
CBO |
institution |
CBO |
reponame_str |
Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online) |
collection |
Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia (Online) - Conselho Brasileiro de Oftalmologia (CBO) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
aboonline@cbo.com.br||abo@cbo.com.br |
_version_ |
1754209026034368512 |