摘要
目的研究不同非球面单焦可折叠后房型人工晶状体（IOL）植入术后调节幅度的比较。方法前瞻性病例对照研究。选取2010年8月至2011年8月在天津医科大学眼科医院行白内障超声乳化联合IOL植入术的年龄相关性白内障患者102例（102眼）．将其分为3组：Rayner组植入RaynerSuperflex920H型10L（Rayner），SN60WF组植入AcrysofIQSN60WF型IOL（Atcon），SN60AT组植入AcrysofNATURALSN60AT型IOL（Alcon）。术后6个月检测患者裸眼远视力、最佳矫正远视力、最佳矫正远视力后的近视力；使用Hartmann．Shack波前像差仪（Wavefront）测量患者球差；使用综合验光仪调节尺测量患者主观调节幅度：使用WR．5100型全自动电脑验光仪（GrandSeiko）测量患者客观调节幅度。采用卡方检验和方差分析分别对计数资料和计量资料行统计学分析。采用Pearson相关分析检验参数相关性。结果Rayner组、SN60WF组和SN60AT组患者主观调节幅度分别为（2．00±0．58）D、（2．26^-0．60）D、（2．29~0．48）D，3组患者客观调节幅度分别为（0．87±0．37）D、（1．01±0．38）D、（1．04±0．37）D，3组患者比较差异均无统计学意义（F±m=2．662，P±m〉0．05；F客观=1．925，P客观〉0．05）。3组患者球差在瞳孔直径为3mm时分别为（0．08±0．04）μm、（0．05±0．04）μm、（0．14±0．05）μm，3组比较差异有统计学意义（F=45．780，P〈0．01）。球差与主、客观调节幅度均无相关性（r主观=0．056，P主观〉0．05；r客观=0．095，Pgm〉0．05）。结论植入AerysofSN60WF型非球面IOL和RaynerSuperflex920H型非球面IOL与植入AerysofSN60AT型球面IOL相比，对调节幅度没有明显影响。球面像差与人工晶状体眼调节幅度不相关。
Objective To compare monofocal posterior chamber intraoeular lenses the accommodation amplitude after different aspherie （IOLs） implantation. Methods A prospective clinical study comprised 102 eyes of 102 patients who underwent phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation in Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital from August 2010 to August 2011. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to the type of IOLs that implanted： Group Rayner were implanted with Rayner Superflex 920H IOL （Rayner）; Group SN60WF were implanted with Acrysof IQ SN60WF IOL （Alcon）; Group SN60AT were implanted with Acrysof NATURAL SN60AT IOL （Alcon）. At 6 months postoperatively, uncorrected visual acuity, best corrected visual acuity, distance corrected near visual acuity were evaluated. Spherical aberration was measured by Hartmann-Shack wavefront sensor. Patients＇ subjective amplitude of accommodation was measured by integrated refractometer adjustment feet; while the objective amplitude of accommodation was measured by WR-5100 automatic computer Refractometer （GrandSeiko）. Statistical analysis of count data and measurement data were done separately by the chi-square test and variance analysis. Pearson correlation was performed to analyze the association between parameters. Results The subjective amplitude of accommodation in the 3 groups were 2.00±0.58 D, 2.264-0.60 D, 2.29：1：0.48 D, respectively, while the objective amplitude of accommodation in the three groups were 0.874-0.37 D, 1.010.38 D,1.04±0.37 D, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the subjective and objective amplitude of accommodation in the 3 groups （F=2.662, Pb=0.075; F=1.925, Pob=0.151）. When the pupil diameter was 3 mm, the spherical aberrations of the three groups were 0.08±0.04 μm, 0.05±0.04μm, 0.14±0.05 μm, respectively. The difference of spherical aberration among the three groups was statistically significant （F=45.780, P〈0.01）. No correlation was found in the spherical aberra
出处
《中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志》
CAS
2013年第4期198-201,共4页
Chinese Journal Of Optometry Ophthalmology And Visual Science
关键词
人工晶状体
非球面
调节幅度
球面像差
白内障
Intraocular lens,aspheric
Amplitude of accommodation
Spherical aberration
Cataract
