2004Journal of Cataract & Refractive SurgeryRequires access

Effect of a modified optic edge design on visual function

Ken Hayashi, Hideyuki Hayashi

Open publisher page 11 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the impairment in visual function caused by glare with 2 acrylic intraocular lenses (IOLs) with different modified optic edges. SETTING: Hayashi Eye Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan. METHODS: Fifty-four patients had implantation of an IOL with a textured edge (Alcon MA60AC) in 1 eye and an IOL with a round-anterior, sloped-sided edge (AMO AR40e) in the opposite eye. Visual acuity was measured at 5 contrast visual targets (100%, 25%, 10%, 5%, and 2.5%) (contrast visual acuity) under photopic and mesopic conditions with and without a glare source approximately 1 month after surgery using the Contrast Sensitivity Accurate Tester (Menicon CAT-2000). RESULTS: The mean mesopic contrast visual acuity at moderate- to low-contrast visual targets was significantly worse in the presence of a glare source in both groups, whereas photopic contrast visual acuity did not change significantly. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in the mean visual acuity or in photopic or mesopic lighting contrast visual acuity with and without a glare source. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in loss of contrast visual acuity in the presence of glare. CONCLUSION: Mesopic contrast sensitivity with both acrylic IOLs was impaired significantly in the presence of glare, but the impairment of contrast sensitivity from glare was approximately the same between eyes with a textured-edge IOL and eyes with a round-anterior, sloped-sided edge IOL.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

PURPOSE: To compare the impairment in visual function caused by glare with 2 acrylic intraocular lenses (IOLs) with different modified optic edges. SETTING: Hayashi Eye Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan. METHODS: Fifty-four patients had implantation of an IOL with a textured edge (Alcon MA60AC) in 1 eye and an IOL with a round-anterior, sloped-sided edge (AMO AR40e) in the opposite eye. Visual acuity was measured at 5 contrast visual targets (100%, 25%, 10%, 5%, and 2.5%) (contrast visual acuity) under photopic and mesopic conditions with and without a glare source approximately 1 month after surgery using the Contrast Sensitivity Accurate Tester (Menicon CAT-2000). RESULTS: The mean mesopic contrast visual acuity at moderate- to low-contrast visual targets was significantly worse in the presence of a glare source in both groups, whereas photopic contrast visual acuity did not change significantly. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in the mean visual acuity or in photopic or mesopic lighting contrast visual acuity with and without a glare source. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in loss of contrast visual acuity in the presence of glare. CONCLUSION: Mesopic contrast sensitivity with both acrylic IOLs was impaired significantly in the presence of glare, but the impairment of contrast sensitivity from glare was approximately the same between eyes with a textured-edge IOL and eyes with a round-anterior, sloped-sided edge IOL.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 11 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the impairment in visual function caused by glare with 2 acrylic intraocular lenses (IOLs) with different modified optic edges. SETTING: Hayashi Eye Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan. METHODS: Fifty-four patients had implantation of an IOL with a textured edge (Alcon MA60AC) in 1 eye and an IOL with a round-anterior, sloped-sided edge (AMO AR40e) in the opposite eye. Visual acuity was measured at 5 contrast visual targets (100%, 25%, 10%, 5%, and 2.5%) (contrast visual acuity) under photopic and mesopic conditions with and without a glare source approximately 1 month after surgery using the Contrast Sensitivity Accurate Tester (Menicon CAT-2000). RESULTS: The mean mesopic contrast visual acuity at moderate- to low-contrast visual targets was significantly worse in the presence of a glare source in both groups, whereas photopic contrast visual acuity did not change significantly. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in the mean visual acuity or in photopic or mesopic lighting contrast visual acuity with and without a glare source. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in loss of contrast visual acuity in the presence of glare. CONCLUSION: Mesopic contrast sensitivity with both acrylic IOLs was impaired significantly in the presence of glare, but the impairment of contrast sensitivity from glare was approximately the same between eyes with a textured-edge IOL and eyes with a round-anterior, sloped-sided edge IOL.

Key concepts: Mesopic vision, Photopic vision, GLARE, Contrast (vision), Visual acuity, Ophthalmology, Medicine, Optometry

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Effect of a modified optic edge design on visual function — Research Paper | ScholarLens