Journal Home
Search for

Volume 29, Issue 7, Pages 1307-1312 (July 2003)


View previous. 18 of 44 View next.

Clinical study of the 1CU accommodating intraocular lens

Leonardo Mastropasqua, MDa, Lisa Toto, MDaCorresponding Author Informationemail address, Mario Nubile, MDa, Gennaro Falconio, MDa, Enzo Ballone, PhDb

Accepted 17 December 2002.

Abstract 

Purpose

To compare the near functional capacities of patients with an accommodating intraocular lens (IOL) with those of patients with a conventional monofocal IOL.

Setting

Department of Ophthalmology, University of Chieti, Chieti, Italy.

Methods

This prospective double-blind case-control study comprised 42 eyes that had phacoemulsification and implantation of 1 of 2 types of IOLs: HumanOptics accommodating 1CU® (study group) and Eurocrystal IFP 3G 6.00 (control group). The main outcome measures were subjective refraction, uncorrected distance acuity, best corrected distance acuity, distance corrected near acuity at 40 cm, best corrected near acuity at 40 cm, and subjective amplitude of accommodation. Patients were examined 7, 30, 90, and 180 days after surgery.

Results

Postoperatively, both groups had excellent uncorrected distance acuity, best corrected distance acuity, and best corrected near acuity. In the study group, the mean distance corrected near acuity (Jaeger) was 5.43 ± 0.98 (SD) (range 4 to 7) at 7 days, 2.33 ± 0.48 (range 2 to 3) at 1 and 3 months, and 3.66 ± 2.12 (range 2 to 7) at 6 months. In the control group, the mean distance corrected near acuity was 7.43 ± 0.50 (range 7 to 8) during the entire follow-up. The differences between the groups was statistically significant (P<.001). The mean amplitude of accommodation was 0.00 diopter (D) in the control group and 1.14 ± 0.44 D (range 0.75 to 2.00 D) in the study group at 7 days, 2.36 ± 0.28 D (range 2.00 to 2.75 D) at 30 and 90 days, and 1.90 ± 0.77 D (range 0.75 to 2.75 D) at 6 months.

Conclusions

The 1CU accommodating IOL provided better useful spectacle-free near visual acuity than the conventional monofocal IOL. However, the accommodating mechanism can play a role in capsule fibrosis.

a Department of Medicine and Ageing Science, Section of Ophthalmology (Mastropasqua, Toto, Nubile, Falconio), University of Chieti, Chieti, Italy

b Department of Medicine and Ageing Science, Laboratory of Biostatistics (Ballone), University of Chieti, Chieti, Italy

Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to Lisa Toto, MD, U.O. di Ottica Fisiopatologica, Ospedale Clinicizzato, Via dei Vestini, Località Colle dell’Ara, 66013 Chieti, Italy.

 None of the authors has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

PII: S0886-3350(03)00072-5

doi:10.1016/S0886-3350(03)00072-5


View previous. 18 of 44 View next.