Comparison of outcomes with multifocal intraocular lenses: a meta-analysis

B&eacute;atrice Cochener1, Antoine Lafuma2, Babak Khoshnood2, Laur&egrave;ne Courouve2, Gilles Berdeaux3,41Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Brest, Brest, France; 2Cemka Eval, Bourg la Reine, France; 3Alcon France, Rueil-Malmaison, France; 4Conservatoire National des Arts et M&amp...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	B&eacute;atrice Cochener, Antoine Lafuma, Babak Khoshnood, et al
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Dove Medical Press 2011
Materias:	Ophthalmology RE1-994
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/a93abd5e74fe48a2b598e40d4fc26ba0
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:a93abd5e74fe48a2b598e40d4fc26ba0
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:a93abd5e74fe48a2b598e40d4fc26ba02021-12-02T01:31:20ZComparison of outcomes with multifocal intraocular lenses: a meta-analysis1177-54671177-5483https://doaj.org/article/a93abd5e74fe48a2b598e40d4fc26ba02011-01-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.dovepress.com/comparison-of-outcomes-with-multifocal-intraocular-lenses-a-meta-analy-a6018https://doaj.org/toc/1177-5467https://doaj.org/toc/1177-5483B&eacute;atrice Cochener1, Antoine Lafuma2, Babak Khoshnood2, Laur&egrave;ne Courouve2, Gilles Berdeaux3,41Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Brest, Brest, France; 2Cemka Eval, Bourg la Reine, France; 3Alcon France, Rueil-Malmaison, France; 4Conservatoire National des Arts et M&eacute;tiers, Paris, FrancePurpose: To compare the clinical outcome of different multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) based on information reported in the international literature.Methods: All comparative clinical trials that involved implanting at least one multifocal IOL in patients with cataract or presbyopia were extracted from the literature. Clinical outcomes included uncorrected near visual acuity, uncorrected distance visual acuity, visual acuity, spectacle independence, and halos. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted to compare outcomes for the different IOL types.Results: Twenty papers were identified describing 11 monofocal IOLs and 35 multifocal IOLs (19 diffractive, including 12 ReSTOR&reg;, 14 refractive, and two accommodative) patient cohorts. Multifocal and monofocal uncorrected distance visual acuity was 0.165 (0.090&ndash;0.240) and 0.093 (0.088&ndash;0.098), respectively. Compared with monofocal IOLs, multifocal IOLs produced better uncorrected near visual acuity (0.470 [0.322&ndash;0.618] versus 0.141 [0.131&ndash;0.152]; P &lt; 0.0001), resulting in higher spectacle independence (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 3.62 [2.90&ndash;4.52]; P &lt; 0.0001). Compared with refractive multifocal IOLs, diffractive multifocal IOLs produced a similar uncorrected distance visual acuity (0.105 [0.098&ndash;0.111] versus 0.085 [0.029&ndash;0.140]; P &le; 0.78, not significant) and better uncorrected near visual acuity (0.217 [0.118&ndash;0.317] versus 0.082 [0.067&ndash;0.098]; P &lt; 0.0001) resulting in higher spectacle independence (IRR 1.75 [1.24&ndash;2.48]; P &lt; 0.001). Compared with other multifocal IOLs, ReSTOR produced a better uncorrected distance visual acuity (0.067 [0.059&ndash;0.076] versus 0.093 [0.088&ndash;0.098]; P &lt; 0.0001) and better uncorrected near visual acuity (0.064 [0.046&ndash;0.082] versus 0.141 [0.131&ndash;0.152]; P &lt; 0.006), resulting in higher spectacle independence (IRR 2.06 [1.26&ndash;1.36]; P &lt; 0.004). Halo incidence rates with different types of multifocal implants did not differ significantly.Conclusion: Multifocal IOLs provide better uncorrected near visual acuity than monofocal IOLs, leading to less need for spectacles. Multifocal IOL design might play a role in postsurgical outcome, because better results were obtained with diffractive lenses. ReSTOR showed better uncorrected near visual acuity, uncorrected distance visual acuity, and higher spectacle independence rates compared with other multifocal IOLs.Keywords: multifocal implants, meta-analysis, uncorrected near visual acuity, uncorrected distance visual acuity, spectacle independence, patient satisfaction B&eacute;atrice CochenerAntoine LafumaBabak Khoshnoodet alDove Medical PressarticleOphthalmologyRE1-994ENClinical Ophthalmology, Vol 2011, Iss default, Pp 45-56 (2011)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Ophthalmology RE1-994
spellingShingle	Ophthalmology RE1-994 B&eacute;atrice Cochener Antoine Lafuma Babak Khoshnood et al Comparison of outcomes with multifocal intraocular lenses: a meta-analysis
description	B&eacute;atrice Cochener1, Antoine Lafuma2, Babak Khoshnood2, Laur&egrave;ne Courouve2, Gilles Berdeaux3,41Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Brest, Brest, France; 2Cemka Eval, Bourg la Reine, France; 3Alcon France, Rueil-Malmaison, France; 4Conservatoire National des Arts et M&eacute;tiers, Paris, FrancePurpose: To compare the clinical outcome of different multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) based on information reported in the international literature.Methods: All comparative clinical trials that involved implanting at least one multifocal IOL in patients with cataract or presbyopia were extracted from the literature. Clinical outcomes included uncorrected near visual acuity, uncorrected distance visual acuity, visual acuity, spectacle independence, and halos. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted to compare outcomes for the different IOL types.Results: Twenty papers were identified describing 11 monofocal IOLs and 35 multifocal IOLs (19 diffractive, including 12 ReSTOR&reg;, 14 refractive, and two accommodative) patient cohorts. Multifocal and monofocal uncorrected distance visual acuity was 0.165 (0.090&ndash;0.240) and 0.093 (0.088&ndash;0.098), respectively. Compared with monofocal IOLs, multifocal IOLs produced better uncorrected near visual acuity (0.470 [0.322&ndash;0.618] versus 0.141 [0.131&ndash;0.152]; P &lt; 0.0001), resulting in higher spectacle independence (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 3.62 [2.90&ndash;4.52]; P &lt; 0.0001). Compared with refractive multifocal IOLs, diffractive multifocal IOLs produced a similar uncorrected distance visual acuity (0.105 [0.098&ndash;0.111] versus 0.085 [0.029&ndash;0.140]; P &le; 0.78, not significant) and better uncorrected near visual acuity (0.217 [0.118&ndash;0.317] versus 0.082 [0.067&ndash;0.098]; P &lt; 0.0001) resulting in higher spectacle independence (IRR 1.75 [1.24&ndash;2.48]; P &lt; 0.001). Compared with other multifocal IOLs, ReSTOR produced a better uncorrected distance visual acuity (0.067 [0.059&ndash;0.076] versus 0.093 [0.088&ndash;0.098]; P &lt; 0.0001) and better uncorrected near visual acuity (0.064 [0.046&ndash;0.082] versus 0.141 [0.131&ndash;0.152]; P &lt; 0.006), resulting in higher spectacle independence (IRR 2.06 [1.26&ndash;1.36]; P &lt; 0.004). Halo incidence rates with different types of multifocal implants did not differ significantly.Conclusion: Multifocal IOLs provide better uncorrected near visual acuity than monofocal IOLs, leading to less need for spectacles. Multifocal IOL design might play a role in postsurgical outcome, because better results were obtained with diffractive lenses. ReSTOR showed better uncorrected near visual acuity, uncorrected distance visual acuity, and higher spectacle independence rates compared with other multifocal IOLs.Keywords: multifocal implants, meta-analysis, uncorrected near visual acuity, uncorrected distance visual acuity, spectacle independence, patient satisfaction
format	article
author	B&eacute;atrice Cochener Antoine Lafuma Babak Khoshnood et al
author_facet	B&eacute;atrice Cochener Antoine Lafuma Babak Khoshnood et al
author_sort	B&eacute;atrice Cochener
title	Comparison of outcomes with multifocal intraocular lenses: a meta-analysis
title_short	Comparison of outcomes with multifocal intraocular lenses: a meta-analysis
title_full	Comparison of outcomes with multifocal intraocular lenses: a meta-analysis
title_fullStr	Comparison of outcomes with multifocal intraocular lenses: a meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed	Comparison of outcomes with multifocal intraocular lenses: a meta-analysis
title_sort	comparison of outcomes with multifocal intraocular lenses: a meta-analysis
publisher	Dove Medical Press
publishDate	2011
url	https://doaj.org/article/a93abd5e74fe48a2b598e40d4fc26ba0
work_keys_str_mv	AT bampeacuteatricecochener comparisonofoutcomeswithmultifocalintraocularlensesametaanalysis AT antoinelafuma comparisonofoutcomeswithmultifocalintraocularlensesametaanalysis AT babakkhoshnood comparisonofoutcomeswithmultifocalintraocularlensesametaanalysis AT etal comparisonofoutcomeswithmultifocalintraocularlensesametaanalysis
_version_	1718403032310349824

Comparison of outcomes with multifocal intraocular lenses: a meta-analysis

Ejemplares similares