A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Contrast sensitivity and glare disability after implantation of AcrySof IQ Natural aspherical intraocular lens: prospective randomized masked clinical trial. | LitMetric

Purpose: To evaluate contrast sensitivity and glare disability after implantation of an AcrySof IQ Natural SN60WF aspherical intraocular lens (IOL) (Alcon Laboratories).

Setting: Iladevi Cataract & IOL Research Centre, Ahmedabad, India.

Methods: One hundred twenty consecutive patients who had phacoemulsification in a prospective triple-masked trial were randomized to receive an AcrySof SA60AT IOL (40 eyes), AcrySof Natural SN60AT IOL (40 eyes), or AcrySof IQ SN60WF IOL (40 eyes). At 3 months, contrast sensitivity was measured using the CSV-1000E contrast sensitivity chart test face (Vector Vision) at 3, 6, 12, and 18 cycles per degrees (cpd) under photopic conditions (85 cd/m(2)) and mesopic conditions (2.7 cd/m(2)) with 4.0 mm and 6.0 mm fixed central apertures, with and without glare. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used and a pair-wise comparison performed. The main outcome measure was the difference in contrast sensitivity between IOLs at each spatial frequency.

Results: The best corrected visual acuity was similar between the 3 IOL groups (P = .6). The AcrySof IQ group had significantly higher contrast sensitivity at 18 cpd under photopic conditions (P = .008); at 3, 6, 12, and 18 cpd during mesopic testing with a 4.0 mm aperture without glare (P = .018, P = .011, P = .007, and P = .0001, respectively) and with glare (P = .003, P = .006, P = .005, and P = .004, respectively); and at all spatial frequencies during mesopic testing with a 6.0 mm aperture without glare (P = .018, P = .006, P = .009, and P = .0001, respectively) and with glare (P = .019, P = .002, P = .01, and P = .017, respectively).

Conclusion: Eyes with the AcrySof IQ SN60WF IOL had significantly higher contrast sensitivity than eyes with an AcrySof SA60AT or AcrySof Natural SN60AT IOL at all spatial frequencies during mesopic testing (with and without glare) with 4.0 and 6.0 mm artificial pupil.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.01.009DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

contrast sensitivity
28
acrysof natural
16
eyes acrysof
16
iol eyes
12
mesopic testing
12
acrysof
9
glare
8
sensitivity glare
8
glare disability
8
disability implantation
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!