Comparison of visual functions and contrast sensitivities between monoblock hydrophobic acryrlic monofocal and monoblock hydrophobic acryrlic multifocal intraocular lenses

Abstract

The quality of life following cataract surgery may be reduced in patients who become partially or completely dependent on eyeglasses. After cataract extraction and the implantation of a monofocal intraocular lens in patients with unilateral cataract, binocular visual functions can be compromised at intermediate and near vision. The main goal of multifocal IOL models is to restore both distance and near visual function. This improvement in the ability of reading is important in today’s information-based society.1,2 Multifocal IOLs are used to compensate for pseudophakic presbyopia and thus improving functional distance, near, and even intermediate vision.3−6 Beside offering good uncorrected near visual acuity in most cases,2,7,8 multifocal IOLs provide also better uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) than most of the monofocal IOLs. The design of multifocal IOLs depend on two optical principles: diffraction, refraction or a combination of diffraction and refraction.9 With the introduction of novel technologies, incoming light rays are distributed to two principal focal points, near vision and distance vision, or to several foci.3,5,10,11 However, several optical side effects including decreased contrast sensitivity, glare disability, or the presence of halos, were reported.8,10,12−18 These effects may significantly affect the patient’s visual performance due to decreased retinal image quality.5 In this study, we aimed to compare monoblock hydrophobic acryrlic monofocal ultraflex (UF) and monoblock hydrophobic acryrlic multifocal revision (RV) intraocular lens implantations on visual acuities and contrast sensitivities after bilateral cataract extraction.