【作者】 潘春晖；

【导师】 谭少健；

【作者基本信息】 广西医科大学 ， 眼科学， 2005， 硕士

【摘要】 目的:比较植入多焦点人工晶状体(MIOL)和单焦点人工晶状体(SIOL)植入术后远期的立体视觉,评价MIOL植入眼远期的立体视觉,进一步完善MIOL植入眼远期视功能的研究。方法:观察2000年至2004年在我院接受白内障超声乳化吸除联合人工晶状体植入的患者共69例,其中双眼MIOL 16例,双眼SIOL 13例,单眼MIOL 20例,单眼SIOL 20例,术后随访时间>m,分别检查术后非矫正近、远视力,矫正近、远视力,屈光,非矫正视力下远、近立体视锐度,矫正视力下远、近立体视锐度,问卷调查术后满意度、视觉症状。结果:90.38%的MIOL眼非矫正近视力≥0.4,优于SIOL眼的21.74%(x~2=53.174,p<0.01,差异具有极显著性);非矫正远视力、矫正远视力及矫正近视力MIOL眼与SIOL眼差异无显著性(p>0.05);非矫正近视力下近立体视锐度,68.75%双眼植入MIOL者≤60s,而双眼植入SIOL者则无≤60s,两组间差异极具显著性(x~2=25.294,p<0.01),单眼植入MIOL组与单眼植入SIOL组间差异无显著性(x~2=3.366,p=0.339,p>0.05);矫正近视力下近立体视锐度,93.75%的双眼植入MIOL者≤60s,相比双眼植入SIOL者的46.15%差异极具显著性(x~2=9.650,p=0.008,p<0.01),单眼植入MIOL组与单眼植入SIOL组间差异无显著性(x~2=2.40,p=0.494,p>0.05);非矫正远视力下及矫正远视力下远立体视锐度,双眼植入MIOL组与双眼植入SIOL组间差异均无显著性,单眼植入MIOL组与单眼植入SIOL组间差异均无显著性:植入MIOL者术后满意度高于植入SIOL者(t=3.512,p=0.001,p<0.01)。结论:术后远期,双眼MIOL植入者近立体视觉优于双眼SIOL植入者,植入MIOL患者满意度高于植入SIOL患者。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate the long-term postoperative steropsis of AMO Array multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Methods Ninety-eight eyes in 69 patients were enrolled in this retrospective study. Sixteen were implanted bilaterally and 20 were implanted unilaterally with the AMO Array SA-40N zonal-progressive foldable multifocal IOL (MIOL), 13 were implanted bilaterally and 20 were implanted unilaterally with AMO SI40N foldable monofocal IOL (SIOL). Distance stereopsis and near stereopsis were measured monocularly and binocularly. Distance visual acuity, near visual acuity and postoperative satisfactory were also evaluated. Results In the MIOL group, 90.38% had 0.4 or more of uncorrected near visual acuity; in the SIOL group, 21.74% had the same level of uncorrected near visual acuity (x~2=53.174, p=0.000, p<0.01). In the bilateral IOL implantation group, 68.75% had 60s or less of near stereopsis acuity with uncorrected near visual acuity; in the bilateral SIOL implantation group, no one had the same level (x~2 = 25.294, p=0.000, p<0.01), and 93.75% and 46.15%, respectively, had 60s or less of near stereopsis acuity with corrected near visual acuity (x~2=9.650, p=0.008, p<0.01). Between the group of bilateral MIOL implantation and bilateral SIOL implantation, there were no significant between-group differences in distance stereopsis with or without corrected distance visual acuity. There were no significant between-group differences in stereopsis between unilateral MIOL group and unilateral SIOL group. Conclusions Bilateral implantation of MIOL appeared to lead to better results than bilateral SIOL implantation. Our results suggested that the patient may be satisfied with MIOL implantation.更多还原