Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery
Volume 33, Issue 9 , Pages 1573-1578, September 2007

Validity of autorefraction after cataract surgery with multifocal ReZoom intraocular lens implantation

From the Refractive Surgery Department (Muñoz, Albarrán-Diego), Centro Oftalmológico Marqués de Sotelo, and Hospital NISA Valencia al Mar (Muñoz, Albarrán-Diego), Valencia, and the Refractive Surgery Department (Muñoz, Sakla), VISSUM Instituto Oftalmológico de Alicante, Alicante, Spain

Accepted 23 May 2007.

Purpose

To evaluate the clinical utility of spherocylindrical automated refraction (AR) compared with subjective manifest refraction (MR) after cataract surgery with implantation of ReZoom refractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) (Advanced Medical Optics, Inc.).

Setting

Private Practice.

Methods

This prospective nonrandomized interventional study consisted of 72 patients with bilateral cataract and a potential visual acuity of at least 20/40. Patients had bilateral nonsimultaneous cataract surgery and implantation of a ReZoom IOL. Manifest refraction was performed in all patients followed by 3 consecutive measurements using the Topcon KR-8000 autorefractor with nondilated and dilated pupils. Assessment of repeatability of multiple consecutive ARs and comparison of the AR and MR using power vector analysis were performed at the 6-month follow-up. The main outcome measures were the correlation between AR and MR with sphere, spherical equivalent, and astigmatism as well as the repeatability of AR before and after dilation with phenylephrine 10%.

Results

Repeatability analysis showed that the initial nondilated AR was not significantly different from the mean of the 3 refractions for nondilated and dilated measurements. The mean difference between the initial AR and the MR was −0.84 ± 0.62 diopters (D) for sphere (SD), −1.00 ± 0.61 D for spherical equivalent, and −0.06 ± 0.19 D and −0.01 ± 0.17 D, respectively, for J0 and J45, the 2 components of astigmatism. Linear regression of AR versus MR data showed poor correlation for sphere (R2 = 0.4852) and spherical equivalent (R2 = 0.5529), whereas the correlation for the 2 astigmatic components of vector analysis was excellent (J0, R2 = 0.8881; J45, R2 = 0.8640). Correlation was better when the MR residual refractive defect was higher.

Conclusions

Although autorefraction showed excellent agreement with subjective refractive astigmatism, correlation with spherical values was poor, with a trend toward more negative values. Autorefraction after ReZoom IOL implantation can be used as a good starting point for subjective refraction of astigmatism; however, spherical values should be underestimated.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

PII: S0886-3350(07)01033-4

doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.05.024

Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery
Volume 33, Issue 9 , Pages 1573-1578, September 2007