Article Text

PDF
Clinical science
Implantation of the multifocal ReSTOR apodised diffractive intraocular lens in adult anisometropic patients with mild to moderate amblyopia
  1. K Petermeier,
  2. F Gekeler,
  3. M S Spitzer,
  4. P Szurman
  1. University Eye Hospital, Centre for Ophthalmology, Eberhard-Karls University, Tuebingen, Germany
  1. Correspondence to Dr K Petermeier, University Eye Hospital, Centre for Ophthalmology, Eberhard-Karls University, Tuebingen, Schleichstr. 12, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany; katrin.petermeier{at}med.uni-tuebingen.de

Abstract

Aim: To assess subjective and objective parameters of visual function after implantation of the AcrySof ReSTOR in amblyopic patients.

Methods: Phacoemulsification and IOL implantation were performed in six eyes of three patients with anisometropic amblyopia. Patients were examined after 16–18 months for uncorrected and distance-corrected visual acuity (VA) for distance, intermediate and near. A defocus curve, the extent of crowding, contrast sensitivity and stereo acuity were recorded.

Results: The mean age of the patients was 56 years (range 53–60). In the non-amblyopic eye, the uncorrected distance VA was 20/25 or better, and the best corrected distance VA was 20/20 or better; in the amblyopic eye, the VA was two to four lines worse. The near VA of the non-amblyopic and the amblyopic eye was equivalent to the distance VA. The defocus curve showed a clear bifocal profile, even in the amblyopic eye. Stereo acuity was found in the Titmus test but not in the random dot tests (Lang-chart and TNO test). All patients had a crowding phenomenon in the amblyopic eye. Binocular contrast sensitivity was within normal limits. Photic phenomena were not reported by any patient, and none of the patients required glasses for any distance, resulting in a high patient satisfaction.

Conclusion: Anisometropic amblyopic patients may benefit from implantation of an AcrySof ReSTOR; no unwanted side effects were detected.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and Peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • See Editorial, p 1271

  • Ethics approval Ethics approval was provided by the ethics committee of the Eberhard-Karls-University, Tübingen.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles

  • Editorial
    Ken K Nischal
  • At a glance
    Harminder S Dua Arun D Singh