RESUMO
PURPOSE: To compare the optical performance and visual outcomes between two diffractive multifocal lenses: AMO Tecnis® ZMB00 and AcrySof® ReSTOR® SN6AD1. METHODS: This prospective, non-randomized comparative study included the assessment of 74 eyes in 37 patients referred for cataract surgery and candidates for multifocal intraocular lens implants. Exclusion criteria included existence of any other eye disease, previous eye surgery, high axial myopia, preoperative corneal astigmatism of >1.00 cylindrical diopter (D), and intraoperative or postoperative complications. Ophthalmological evaluation included the measurement of uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA), and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA), with analysis of contrast sensitivity (CS), wavefront, and visual defocus curve. RESULTS: Postoperative UDVA was 0.09 and 0.08 logMAR in the SN6AD1 and ZMB00 groups, respectively (p=0.868); postoperative CDVA was 0.04 and 0.02 logMAR in the SN6AD1 and ZMB00 groups, respectively (p=0.68); DCIVA was 0.17 and 0.54 logMAR in the SN6AD1 and ZMB00 groups, respectively (p=0.000); and DCNVA was 0.04 and 0.09 logMAR in the SN6AD1 and ZMB00 groups, respectively (p=0.001). In both cases, there was an improvement in the spherical equivalent and UDVA (p<0.05). Under photopic conditions, the SN6AD1 group had better CS at low frequencies without glare (p=0.04); however, the ZMB00 group achieved better sensitivity at high frequencies with glare (p=0.003). The SN6AD1 and ZMB00 lenses exhibited similar behavior for intermediate vision, according to the defocus curve; however, the ZMB00 group showed a shorter reading distance than the SN6AD1 group. There were no significant differences regarding aberrometry between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Both lenses promoted better quality of vision for both long and short distances and exhibited a similar behavior for intermediate vision. The SN6AD1 and ZMB00 groups showed better results for CS under photopic conditions at low and high spatial frequencies, respectively.
Assuntos
Implante de Lente Intraocular/métodos , Lentes Intraoculares , Acuidade Visual/fisiologia , Aberrometria , Idoso , Análise de Variância , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Período Pós-Operatório , Período Pré-Operatório , Desenho de Prótese , Valores de Referência , Refração Ocular , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
ABSTRACT Purpose: To compare the optical performance and visual outcomes between two diffractive multifocal lenses: AMO Tecnis® ZMB00 and AcrySof® ReSTOR® SN6AD1. Methods: This prospective, non-randomized comparative study included the assessment of 74 eyes in 37 patients referred for cataract surgery and candidates for multifocal intraocular lens implants. Exclusion criteria included existence of any other eye disease, previous eye surgery, high axial myopia, preoperative corneal astigmatism of >1.00 cylindrical diopter (D), and intraoperative or postoperative complications. Ophthalmological evaluation included the measurement of uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA), and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA), with analysis of contrast sensitivity (CS), wavefront, and visual defocus curve. Results: Postoperative UDVA was 0.09 and 0.08 logMAR in the SN6AD1 and ZMB00 groups, respectively (p=0.868); postoperative CDVA was 0.04 and 0.02 logMAR in the SN6AD1 and ZMB00 groups, respectively (p=0.68); DCIVA was 0.17 and 0.54 logMAR in the SN6AD1 and ZMB00 groups, respectively (p=0.000); and DCNVA was 0.04 and 0.09 logMAR in the SN6AD1 and ZMB00 groups, respectively (p=0.001). In both cases, there was an improvement in the spherical equivalent and UDVA (p<0.05). Under photopic conditions, the SN6AD1 group had better CS at low frequencies without glare (p=0.04); however, the ZMB00 group achieved better sensitivity at high frequencies with glare (p=0.003). The SN6AD1 and ZMB00 lenses exhibited similar behavior for intermediate vision, according to the defocus curve; however, the ZMB00 group showed a shorter reading distance than the SN6AD1 group. There were no significant differences regarding aberrometry between the two groups. Conclusion: Both lenses promoted better quality of vision for both long and short distances and exhibited a similar behavior for intermediate vision. The SN6AD1 and ZMB00 groups showed better results for CS under photopic conditions at low and high spatial frequencies, respectively.
RESUMO Objetivo: Comparar o desempenho óptico e resultado visual entre duas lentes multifocais difrativas: AMO Tecnis® ZMB00 e AcrySof® ReSTOR® SN6AD1. Métodos: O estudo prospectivo, comparativo não randomizado incluiu avaliação de 74 olhos em 37 pacientes com indicação de facectomia e candidatos a implante de lente multifocal. Critérios de exclusão foram: presença de outras doenças oculares; cirurgia ocular prévia; alta miopia axial; astigmatismo cornenano maior que 1,00 D cilíndrica; complicações intraoperatórias ou pós-operatórias. A avaliação oftalmológica contou com medida da acuidade visual para longe corrigida (CDVA) e não corrigida (UDVA), intermediária (DCIVA) e curta distância (DCNVA) com melhor correção óptica para longe; teste de sensibilidade ao contraste; análise de frente de onda e curva visual de Defocus. Resultados: A UDVA foi de 0,09 logMAR para o grupo SN6AD1 e 0,08 logMAR para o grupo ZMB00; com correção foi de 0,04 logMAR para SN6AD1 e 0,02 para o grupo ZMB00 (p>0,05). O grupo SN6AD1 obteve valor de 0,04 logMAR e o grupo ZMB00 de 0,09 logMAR para DCNVA (p<0,05) e DCIVA de 0,17 logMAR para SN6AD1 e 0,54 logMAR para ZMB00 (p=0,000). Houve melhora do equivalente esférico e da UDVA em ambos os grupos (p<0,05). Em condições fotópicas, o grupo SN6AD1 teve melhor sensibilidade ao contraste em baixas frequências sem ofuscamento (p<0,05), contudo grupo ZMB00 obteve melhor sensibilidade em altas frequências (p<0,05) com ofuscamento. As lentes SN6AD1 e ZMB00 obtiveram comportamento semelhantes para visão intermediária na curva de Defocus, porém, o grupo ZMB00 mostrou menor distância de leitura que o grupo SN6AD1. Não houve diferença com significância estatística relacionada à aberrometria na comparação dos dois grupos. Conclusão: As duas lentes promoveram melhor qualidade de visão para longe e perto e comportamento semelhante para visão intermediária. O grupo ZMB00 exibiu melhores resultados para sensibilidade ao contraste em condições fotópicas em alta frequência espacial e SN6AD1 em baixa frequência espacial.
