Aspheric AcrySof Research Articles

Contrast visual acuity after multifocal intraocular lens implantation: aspheric versus spherical design.

To evaluate contrast visual acuity (CVA) after implantation of an aspheric apodized diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) or a spherical apodized diffractive IOL in cataract surgery. This prospective randomized controlled study with a 12-month follow-up compared the results of cataract surgery with implantation of an aspheric AcrySof ReSTOR SN6AD3 IOL (30 eyes) and a spherical AcrySof ReSTOR SN60D3 IOL (30 eyes). CVA with best distance correction was measured at 4 contrast levels (100%, 25%, 10% and 5%) under 3 levels of chart luminance [250, 85 and 25 candelas per square meter (cd/m(2))] using a multi-functional visual acuity tester (MFVA-100). At 12 months after surgery, there were no statistically significant differences in 100% CVA and 25% CVA under 250cd/m(2) (P 100%=0.875 and P 25%=0.057) and 85cd/m(2) (P 100%=0.198 and P 25%=0.193) between the aspheric group and the spherical group. However, the 10% CVA and 5% CVA were significant better in aspheric group than spherical group under 250cd/m(2) (P 10%=0.042 and P 5%=0.007) and 85cd/m(2) (P 10%=0.002 and P 5%=0.039). Under the luminance level of 25cd/m(2), no significant differences was found in the 100% CVA between the 2 group (P 100%=0.245), while aspheric group had better visual acuity in the remaining 3 contracts (P 25%=0.023, P 10%=0.026 and P 5%=0.002, respectively). [corrected] The aspheric AcrySof ReSTOR SN6AD3 IOL provided patients with better low-contrast visual acuity than the spherical AcrySof ReSTOR SN60D3 IOL.

Contrast Sensitivity and Spherical Aberration in Eyes Implanted with AcrySof IQ and AcrySof Natural Intraocular Lens: the Results of a Meta-Analysis

BackgroundTo systematically evaluate the visual performance of aspheric AcrySof IQ and spherical AcrySof Natural intraocular lens (IOL) after cataract surgery.Methodology/Principal FindingsPotential randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that involved implanting AcrySof IQ and AcrySof Natural were searched from PubMed, Web of science, EMBASE, Chinese Science and Technology Periodicals Databases and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by the Jadad method. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), contrast sensitivity and spherical aberration were pooled using a random-effects model. Seven studies were identified and analyzed to compare AcrySof IQ (236 eyes) with AcrySof Natural (232 eyes) after phacoemulsification. There was no significant difference in postoperative BCVA between AcrySof IQ and AcrySof Natural (p =0.137) after a follow up of 3 months. For contrast sensitivity, these differences reached statistical significance under photopic conditions at two spatial frequencies (3 cycles per degree (cpd), 6 cpd, 12 cpd, and 18 cpd; p =0.022, p =0.017, p = 0.065, and p=0.191, respectively) and under mesopic conditions at three spatial frequencies (3 cpd, 6 cpd, 12 cpd, and 18 cpd; p =0.007, p =0.033, p =0.030, and p =0.080, respectively). Eyes with AcrySof IQ also had statistically significant less spherical aberration than eyes with AcrySof Natural (p<0.001). Sensitivity analysis showed that the results were relatively stable and reliable.Conclusions/SignificanceThe overall findings indicate that AcrySof IQ with a modified aspheric surface induced significantly less spherical aberration than AcrySof Natural. Contrast sensitivity in eyes with AcrySof IQ is better than that in eyes with AcrySof Natural, especially under mesopic conditions.

Contrast sensitivity after refractive lens exchange with a multifocal diffractive aspheric intraocular lens

To evaluate distance and near contrast sensitivity (CS) under photopic and mesopic conditions before and after refractive lens exchange (RLE) and implantation of the aspheric AcrySofReSTOR (SN6AD3 model) intraocular lens (IOL). Seventy-four eyes of 37 patients after RLE underwent bilateral implantation with the aspheric AcrySof ReSTOR IOL. The patient sample was divided into myopic and hyperopic groups. Monocular uncorrected visual acuity at distance and near (UCVA and UCNVA, respectively) and monocular best corrected visual acuity at distance and near (BCVA and BCNVA, respectively) were measured before and 6 months postoperatively. Monocular CS function was measured at three different luminance levels (85, 5 and 2.5 cd/m²) before and after RLE. Post-implantation results at 6 months were compared with those found before surgery. Our results revealed that patients in both groups obtained good UCVA and BCVA after RLE at distance and near vision in relation to pre-surgery values. No statistically significant differences were found between the values of CS pre and post-RLE at distance and near, at any lighting condition and spatial frequency (p>0.002). Refractive lens exchange with aspheric AcrySof ReSTOR IOL in myopic and hyperopic population provided good visual function and yield good distance and near CS under photopic and mesopic conditions.

Optical Aberrations and Contrast Sensitivity of Spherical and Aspheric Intraocular Lenses – A Prospective Comparative Clinical Study

Purpose: To compare visual acuity, aberrometry, and contrast sensitivity in eyes with spherical intraocular lens (IOL) and aspheric IOL implanted after uncomplicated phacoemulsification. Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic. Methods: A prospective clinical study involving 90 patients (105 eyes) having cataract surgery, with implantation of spherical IOL AcrySof Natural (SN60AT) in 45 patients (50 eyes) with a mean age of 62.5 years, and aspheric IOL AcrySof IQ (SN60WF) in 45 patients (55 eyes) with a mean age of 64.5 years. A control group involved 22 eyes of similar age with clear lens crystallina. Postoperatively, visual acuity (ETDRS charts), aberrometry (ORK Wavefront Analyser, Schwind), and contrast sensitivity tests (CSV 1000, Contrast Sensitivity 8010 System) were evaluated. Statistical analyses were performed using Student t-test. Results: No statistical differences were found regarding visual acuity among eyes. A lower level of higher order aberrations was achieved in the aspheric group. In the contrast sensitivity test, no statistical differences between groups under photopic conditions were noted. In mesopic conditions better performance was observed in eyes with aspheric IOLs, mainly in low spatial frequencies (statistically significant). The control group (lens crystallina) was better in all frequencies. Conclusions: Cataract surgery outcomes cannot be measured by means of visual acuity alone. In this study, the aspheric IOLs AcrySof IQ (SN60WF) demonstrated better visual function, especially contrast sensitivity in low spatial frequences, when compared with spherical IOLs AcrySof Natural (SN60AT).

Effect of intraocular lens asphericity on posterior capsule opacification between two intraocular lenses with same acrylic material: a fellow‐eye study

To evaluate intra-individual differences in posterior capsule opacification (PCO) and visual performance between spherical AcrySof SN60AT and an aspheric AcrySof SN60WF intraocular lens (IOL) with a posterior aspheric surface, both of which are made of same hydrophobic acrylic material. Ophthalmology Department, St Thomas' Hospital, London, UK. In this prospective randomized, fellow-eye comparison, an aspheric IOL, which is 9% thinner in comparison with the spherical IOL, was randomized to the first eye of 47 patients and fellow-eye surgery was performed within 3 weeks. Follow-up was at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. Corrected logMAR visual acuity (CDVA) was measured at 100% and 9% contrast. After pupil dilation, digital retroillumination photographs were taken and the mean PCO percentage was calculated using poco software at each follow-up visit. At 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months, 47 (94 eyes), 44 (88 eyes), 42 (84 eyes) and 41 (82 eyes) patients were followed-up respectively. Hundred per cent and 9% of LogMAR CDVA was not significantly different between the two IOLs (p = NS at all time-points). Percentage area PCO scores (mean ± SD) at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months with the spherical IOL was 5.82 ± 9.89, 7.76 ± 16.83, 7.21 ± 12.46, 9.29 ± 18.25 and 14.39 ± 25.42, respectively, and with an aspheric IOL was 8.91 ± 12.79, 5.97 ± 10.32, 5.15 ± 7.92, 7.68 ± 11.18 and 12.18 ± 20.10, respectively (p = NS at all time-points). Posterior capsule opacification was not significantly different between the spheric and aspheric IOLs in this fellow-eye, randomized comparison. Additional asphericity on the existing model of IOL does not influence PCO performance.

Visual outcome and patient satisfaction after multifocal intraocular lens implantation: Aspheric versus spherical design

To evaluate visual outcomes and patient satisfaction after implantation of an aspheric apodized diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) or a spherical apodized diffractive IOL in cataract surgery. Maastricht University Medical Center, The Netherlands. Nonrandomized clinical trial. This prospective nonrandomized study with a 6-month follow-up compared the results of cataract surgery with implantation of an aspheric AcrySof ReSTOR SN6AD3 IOL and a spherical AcrySof ReSTOR SN60D3 IOL. Main outcome measures were uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuities, uncorrected (UNVA) and distance-corrected (DCNVA) near visual acuities, straylight levels, incidence of glare and halos, and contrast sensitivity levels. The mean UDVA was 0.14 ± 0.15 logMAR in the aspheric group (47 eyes) and 0.14 logMAR ± 0.17 (SD) in the spherical group (45 eyes) and the mean CDVA, -0.01 ± 0.06 logMAR and 0.02 ± 0.10 logMAR, respectively. The mean UNVA was Jaeger (J) 1 in 83.0% of patients in the aspheric group and 55.5% of patients in the spherical IOL group (P = .003). The DCNVA was J1 in 95.7% and 71.1%, respectively (P = .001). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in contrast sensitivity levels, intraocular straylight levels, incidence of night-vision symptoms, or subjective rating of vision. Patients with the aspheric multifocal IOL had significantly better near vision than patients with the multifocal spherical IOL. The UDVA, CDVA, intraocular straylight, night-vision symptoms, and contrast sensitivity were similar between the 2 groups.

Comparison of reading performance after bilateral implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses with +3.00 or +4.00 diopter addition

To compare reading ability after cataract surgery and bilateral implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with a +3.00 diopter (D) addition (add) or a +4.00 D add. Department of Ophthalmology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. Prospective comparative study. Patients scheduled for cataract surgery were randomly assigned to bilateral implantation of an aspheric AcrySof ReSTOR multifocal IOL with a +3.00 diopter (D) addition (add) or a +4.00 D add. The reading speed, critical print size, and reading acuity were measured binocularly with best correction using MNREAD acuity charts 6 months after surgery. Patients were tested with the chart at the best patient-preferred reading distance and at 40 cm. Binocular uncorrected and best distance-corrected visual acuities at far and near were also measured. The study enrolled 32 patients. At the best reading distance, the results were similar between the 2 IOL groups in all reading parameters. When tested at 40 cm, reading speed at all print sizes from 0.3 to 0.0 (all P<.001), critical print size (P<.001), and reading acuity (P = .014) were statistically significantly better in the +3.00 D IOL group than in the +4.00 D IOL group. Uncorrected and corrected visual acuities at far and near were similar between the 2 groups. Although the 2 IOL groups had similar performance in reading parameters, patients had to adjust to their best reading distance. The +3.00 D IOL performed better than the +4.00 D IOL at 40 cm.

Aspheric toric intraocular lenses for cataractous eyes: correction of corneal cylinder and spherical aberration

The corneas of many cataractous eyes have clinically significant astigmatism, and the corneas of almost all eyes have positive spherical aberration. The aspheric AcrySof® IQ Toric intraocular lens (IOL; Alcon Laboratories Inc., TX, USA) compensates for both corneal astigmatism and corneal spherical aberration. The aspheric profile of these IOLs was designed to match the profile of nontoric aspheric IOLs that had demonstrated clinically superior contrast sensitivity versus spherical IOLs. The platform of this toric IOL is rotationally stable and has a low repositioning rate. Patients with AcrySof Toric IOLs had low residual cylinder, good uncorrected distance visual acuity and high rates of spectacle independence, which may be associated with reduced lifetime patient costs and increased patient satisfaction. Aspheric IQ Toric IOLs should be as safe and efficacious as their spherical toric IOL predecessors and should also offer an added visual quality benefit owing to the new aspheric design.

Clinical study of Acrysof IQ aspheric intraocular lenses

To determine whether implantation of anaspheric intraocular lens (SN 60 WF Alcon) results in reduced spherical aberration and improved contrast sensitivity after cataract surgery. Randomized, prospective study. 260 patients/eyes were randomized to receive two intraocular lens types: Alcon Acrysof Natural (136 eyes) and Acrysof IQ (124 eyes). Quality of vision was measured by visual acuity and contrast sensitivity under mesopic and photopic conditions. Ocular aberrations for 4.0- and 6.0-mm pupil were measured with Allegretto Wavelight Analyzer. All ophthalmologic were performed 7, 30 and 90 days postoperatively. Visual function index (VF-14) questionnaires for cataract symptoms were performed 90 days after surgery by all the patients. After 90 days, all eyes had mean postoperative best spectacle-corrected visual acuity 0.75. Eyes with the Acrysof IQ had significantly higher contrast sensitivity than eyes with the Acrysof Natural at high and middle spatial frequencies. A significant reduction in spherical aberration after Acrysof IQ implantation was achieved. The Acrysof IQ also had lower values of high-order aberration with 4.0- and 6.0-mm pupil when compared with the AcrySof Natural. Results show the aspheric Acrysof IQ induced significantly less high-order aberration and spherical aberration compared with the Acrysof Natural. Contrast sensitivity revealed better values with the Acrysof IQ intraocular lens.

Comparison between OPD-scan results and contrast sensitivity of three intraocular lenses: spheric AcrySof SN60AT, aspheric AcrySof SN60WF and multifocal AcrySof Restor lens

Purpose: Compare the OPD-scan results and the contrast sensitivity in patients who had implantation of the AcrySof SN60D3 multifocal IOL, the AcrySof SA60AT spheric monofocal IOL and the AcrySof SN60AT aspheric monofocal IOL. Methods: Thirty-two eyes received the multifocal IOL, 32 eyes received the spheric monofocal IOL and 32 eyes received the aspheric monofocal IOL. They were closely paired in age, sex, pre-operative wavefront analysis and contrast sensitivity. All patients was tested with the OPD-scan aberrometer, ETDRS chart at 100% and 9% contrasts and contrast sensitivity. Results: Statistically significant differences were detected more total aberration in SN60AT group (KW = 9.42; p=0.009) when compared to SN60D3 group (p=0.016) and SN60WF group (p=0.0047). The SN60AT group (KW = 16.20; p=0.0003) showed with high spherical aberration values compared to the SN60WF (p=0.00046) and SN60D3 (p=0.0014) group. No significant differences were found between groups in far-distance VA measured using ETDRS at 100% and 9% contrast. The SN60D3 group compared to SN60AT group (p=0.016) had low contrast sensitivity (log units) with statistical difference in 6.0 cpd (KW = 7.84; p=0.0199), but no statistical difference between SN60WF and SN60AT group (p=0.91) and SN60WF and SN60D3 group (p=0.051). The SN60D3 group had low contrast sensitivity performed under mesopic conditions (KW = 10.79; p=0,0045) in 6cpd spatial frequency compared to the SN60AT group (p=0.011) and to the SN60WF group (p=0.007) with statistical significant differences. Conclusion: In all analyzed parameters of OPD-scan aberrometry the aspheric and the multifocal IOLs provided less total and spherical aberrations than spheric IOLs. All IOLs provided an excellent high and low contrasts vision, the multifocal IOL was as good as the spheric and aspheric monofocal IOLs.

Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity in Eyes Implanted with Aspheric and Spherical Intraocular Lenses

To compare visual acuity and contrast sensitivity (CS) in eyes implanted with aspheric and spherical intraocular lenses (IOLs) after cataract surgery. Randomized, prospective study. Five hundred twenty-four eyes from 262 cataract surgery patients implanted with 2 IOL models: the AcrySof IQ (262 eyes) and AcrySof SN60AT (262 eyes; Alcon Laboratories, Fort Worth, TX). High-contrast photopic best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCVA) and CS under photopic (85 cd/m(2)) and mesopic (6 cd/m(2)) conditions were measured. Pupil diameter was analyzed for distance vision under both lighting conditions. Follow-up was carried out for 6 months in all patients. Best-corrected distance visual acuity and photopic and mesopic CS after implantation under monocular and binocular conditions. No statistically significant differences in BCVA were found between either IOL (0.06+/-0.06 and 0.05+/-0.07 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution units for AcrySof SN60AT and AcrySof IQ groups, respectively; P = 0.091). One hundred percent of patients achieved BCVA of 20/32 or better in both groups. The percentage of patients who achieved BCVA of 20/25 or better was 86.3%. The AcrySof IQ IOL group showed better monocular and binocular CS at 6, 12, and 18 cpd under photopic conditions and at 3, 6, 12, and 18 cpd under mesopic conditions (P<0.001). Eyes implanted with the aspheric AcrySof IQ IOL showed better photopic and mesopic CS at medium and high spatial frequencies than eyes implanted with the spherical AcrySof SN60AT IOL. High-contrast photopic BCVA was similar between both IOLs. The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

Visual function after implantation of an aspheric bifocal intraocular lens

To evaluate distance, intermediate, and near vision after bifocal aspheric AcrySof ReSTOR SN6AD1 intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Fernández-Vega Ophthalmological Institute, Oviedo, Spain. Binocular distance best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) (4.0 m), best distance-corrected near (40.0 cm) and intermediate (70.0, 60.0, 50.0 cm) acuities, and contrast sensitivity under photopic (85.0 candelas [cd]/m(2)) and mesopic (3.0 cd/m(2)) conditions with and without glare were measured postoperatively. A patient-satisfaction and visual phenomena questionnaire was administered. Six months postoperatively, the mean acuities (logMAR) were binocular BCVA, -0.064 +/- 0.049 (SD); best corrected near, -0.041 +/- 0.061; best corrected intermediate, 0.147 +/- 0.130 (70.0 cm), 0.036 +/- 0.133 (60.0 cm), and -0.126 +/- 0.077 (50.0 cm). The BCVA and best corrected near acuity were 20/25 or better in all patients. Through-focus binocular logMAR acuities had 2 peaks at the expected far focus and near focus (0.00 diopter [D] and -2.40 D, respectively), with somewhat reduced acuity (20/32) at intermediate distances. Photopic contrast sensitivity was within the standard normal range. Mesopic contrast sensitivity was lower than under photopic conditions, particularly at higher spatial frequencies. Patients reported good performance for distance, near, and intermediate visual tasks with no or minimal difficulty with specific tasks. No patient reported severe visual phenomena; halos and glare were rated as none to moderate. The aspheric IOL provided good functional vision at far and near, with lower performance at intermediate distance; good photopic contrast sensitivity and lower mesopic performance; and a low incidence of visual disturbances.

Wavefront aberrations, depth of focus, and contrast sensitivity with aspheric and spherical intraocular lenses: Fellow-eye study

To compare wavefront aberration, depth of focus, contrast sensitivity, and in vivo modulation transfer function (MTF) after fellow-eye implantation of aspheric and spherical intraocular lenses (IOLs). Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom. This prospective randomized controlled study comprised patients with bilateral cataract who received an aspheric AcrySof SN60WF IOL or a spherical AcrySof SN60AT IOL in the first eye and the other IOL in the second eye. Assessments at 3 and 6 months included 100% and 9% logMAR best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and photopic and mesopic functional acuity contrast testing. Total internal and corneal aberrations and depth of focus were computed. Distance-corrected near logMAR acuity was available at 12 months. At 3 and 6 months, there was no significant difference in 100% and 9% BCVA or photopic contrast sensitivity. Mesopic contrast sensitivity was better and total and internal spherical aberrations were significantly less with the aspheric IOL. Total and internal eye vertical coma was reduced with aspheric IOL. Total MTF was not significantly different between groups. The aspheric IOL group had 0.46 diopter less depth of focus than the spherical IOL group at 6 months (P<.05). Distance-corrected near acuity was significantly better with the spherical IOL. Aspheric IOLs significantly reduced spherical aberration, improving mesopic contrast sensitivity. Vertical coma was reduced with aspheric IOLs. Reduction of aberrations may be responsible for reduced depth of focus with aspheric IOLs. This may be disadvantageous for near vision and reading ability.

Decentration, Tilt and Anterior Chamber Depth: Aspheric vs Spheric Acrylic Intraocular Lens

Purpose: To compare the decentration, tilt and anterior chamber depth between aspheric AcrySof IQ IOL (SN60WF) and spheric AcrySof Natural IOL (SN60AT). Methods: The subjects of this study consisted of 22 patients (26 eyes) using an aspheric AcrySof IQ IOL and 26 patients (31 eyes) using spheric AcrySof Natural IOL. All lenses were inserted into the capsular bag after 5 mm continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis and phacoemulsification. The decentration, tilt and anterior chamber depth of both IOLs were measured on the 1st, 30th and 60th postoperative day using an anterior eye segment analysis system (Scheimpflug camera, EAS-1000, Nidek, Japan). Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the decentration between the IQ IOL and Natural IOL on the 1st (p=0.05), 30th (p=0.09) and 60th (p=0.06) postoperative day. There was a statistically significant difference in tilt between IQ IOL and Natural IOL on the 1st (p=0.000053) and 30th (p=0.018) postoperative day. However, there was no statistically significant difference in tilt on the 60th postoperative day (p=0.05). The anterior chamber depth of IQ IOL was decreased, but was not statistically significant on the 1st (p=0.10), 30th (p=0.07) or 60th (p=0.06) postoperative day. Conclusions: There were no significant differences between AcrySof IQ IOL and AcrySof Natural IOL in decentration, tilt or anterior chamber depth, showing that posterior aspheric surface causes little effect on the IOL stability.

Comparison of Higher Order Aberrations with Spherical and Aspheric Iols Compared to Normal Phakic Eyes

To compare higher order aberrations (HOA) in AcrySof SN60AT and Acrysof IQ SN60WF intraocular lenses (IOLs) and natural crystalline lenses in an age-matched population. Sixty-nine eyes of 55 patients were examined. Group I included AcrySof spheric lenses, group II AcrySof aspheric lenses, and group III included patients with the natural crystalline lens. The HOA data were obtained with a LADARWave aberrometer (Alcon Inc.). Analysis was based on the RMS of coma, spherical aberrations (SA), and HOA. Statistical comparisons were performed with Kruskal Wallis variance analysis. In the case of coma, there were statistically significant differences between spheric and aspheric AcrySof (p<0.005) and between spheric AcrySof and natural crystalline lenses (p<0.005). The differences between aspheric AcrySof and natural crystalline lens group were not significant (p>0.05). SA were significantly different between spheric and aspheric AcrySof group, and spheric AcrySof and natural crystalline lens group (p<0.005), as well as between aspheric AcrySof and natural crystalline lens group (p<0.05). In case of HOAno significant differences were observed between aspheric AcrySof and natural crystalline lens group (p>0.05), but differences between groups AcrySof spheric and aspheric, and spheric AcrySof and natural crystalline lens, showed high significance (p<0.005). The AcrySof Natural IQ aspheric model SN60WF IOL did not change the optical quality of vision compared to a healthy population of 60-80 years of age. The AcrySof Natural model SN60AT spherical IOL resulted in higher HOAs relative to both the natural crystalline lens population and eyes after aspheric AcrySof IQ model SN60WF IOL implantation.

Visual Performance after AcrySof ReSTOR Aspheric Intraocular Lens Implantation

Purpose To evaluate distance, intermediate and near visual performance in patients who had undergone implantation of the multifocal aspheric AcrySof ReSTOR intraocular lens (IOL). Methods Binocular best distance corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at high and low contrast [4 m], best distance corrected near visual acuity (BCNVA) [40 cm], intermediate visual acuity [80 and 60 cm], and distance contrast sensitivity (CS) under photopic [85 cd/m 2] and mesopic [3 cd/m 2] conditions, were measured in 36 eyes that underwent implantation of the AcrySof ReSTOR Aspheric IOL (SN6AD3). Results At the 3-month postoperative visit, binocular BCVA was -0.058±0.091, 0.200±0.079, and 0.258±0.071 logMAR, for 100%, 25% and 12.5% of contrast, respectively. Binocular BCNVA was -0.025±0.062 logMAR. Intermediate visual acuity varied significantly as a function of the distance to the test ( P<0.01), but all patients showed 20/25 or better visual acuity at any distance. Photopic CS was within the standard normal range. Under mesopic conditions CS was lower particularly at higher spatial frequencies compared to photopic conditions. Conclusions The AcrySof ReSTOR Aspheric IOL provide good high-contrast visual acuity at both distance and near; and CS at photopic and mesopic conditions. Intermediate vision is improved in relation to that found with the spherical AcrySof ReSTOR model.