Clinical observation on preserved degrees of accommodative intraocular lens

Abstract

Objective To observe the vision circumstance and the change of accommodation after implantation of preserved degrees of accommodative intraocular lens. Methods Thirty cases （60 eyes） were implanted with accommodative intraocular lens, among which the SRKT for the research group, 15 cases （30 eyes）, was theoretically over-corrected 0.5D in the major visual eyes and over 1.0D in the minor visual eyes; the SRKT for the control group, 15 cases （30 eyes） randomly chosen, was equal to the theoretical value for both the major and minor visual eyes. After the implantation, follow-up visits were above 3 months to observe the distant vision, near vision, optimal corrected distant and near visions, to determine the accommodation by objective and subjective methods and to test the combined distant and near visions of both eyes. Results In the research group, the diopter （D） of the major and minor visual eyes was 0.512±0.15 and 1.13± 0.12 respectively.The distant visions of the naked major visual eyes and the optimal corrected distant visions of the research and the control groups were 0.89± 0.11 and 0.91± 0.12, 0.97± 0.23 and 0.99± 0.14 respectively, exerting no significant difference. The 33 cm near visions of the major visual eyes and the optimal corrected near visions of the major visual eyes were 0.63± 0.16 and 0.48± 0.23, 0.97±0.25 and 0.86± 0.14, exerting significant difference. The optimal corrected near visions of the minor visual eyes are 0.99± 0.15 and 0.89± 0.14, having significant difference. For the accommodation （D） of two groups by the subjective method, it was 3.35± 0.71 and 3.27± 1.32 respectively without significant difference; while by the objective method, it was 0.38± 0.12 and 0.37±0.08 without significant difference. The distant vision of the combined eyes of two groups was 0.99±0.11 and 0.98± 0.21, exerting no significant difference. The near vision of the combined eyes of two groups was 0.91± 0.20 and 0.61± 0.17, exerting very significant difference. Conclusions There is no significant difference of implanting preserved degrees of accommodative intraocular lens on aspects of major visual eye＇s distant vision, optimal corrected vision, and distant vision of combined two eyes. As for 33 cm near vision and the optimal corrected near vision of the major and minor eyes, they both have significant difference. There is very significant difference on the near vision of the combined two eyes. To preserve some certain degrees of the accommodative intraocular lens on the basis of self-adjustment can obviously improve the visual function of the near vision. Key words: Accommodative Intraocular Lens; Phacoemulsification; Near vision