Back to Freepaper Session

Comparison of patient reported satisfaction with vision between bilateral ReSTOR 2.5 and contralateral combination of ReSTOR 2.5/3.0 multifocal IOLs

Session Details

Session Title: Intraocular correction of presbyopia : multifocal IOLs, Monovision

Session Date/Time: Tuesday 08/10/2013 | 14:00-16:00

Paper Time: 14:00

Venue: Elicium 1 (First Floor)

First Author: : R.Nuijts THE NETHERLANDS

Co Author(s): :    N. Bauer   F. van den Biggelaar   M. Venkiteshwar        

Abstract Details

Purpose:

Compare subjective reported outcomes with vision between patients implanted with bilateral ReSTOR 2.5 vs contralateral ReSTOR 2.5/3.0 multifocal IOLs.

Setting:

University Eye Clinic Maastricht, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Methods:

Up to 100 patients in a randomized clinical trial will be randomized to receiving either bilateral ReSTOR 2.5 or contralateral ReSTOR 2.5/3.0 multifocal IOLs. In the latter group, ReSTOR 2.5 will be implanted in the dominant eye and ReSTOR 3.0 in the non-dominant eye. Patient will rate their satisfaction with vision will be evaluated by binocular defocus curve measurements with best distance correction (CVA) and ETDRS logMAR chart.

Results:

The range of vision in both groups will be presented and any differences in the intermediate and near distances between the groups will be discussed. The preferred reading distance between the two groups will be presented.

Conclusions:

The range of vision offered by both bilateral ReSTOR 2.5 and contralateral ReSTOR 2.5/3.0 and use of either type of implantation to match patient needs will be discussed.

Financial Interest:

... is employed by a for-monetary company with an interest in the subject of the presentation, ... research is funded, fully or partially, by a competing company, ... research is funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, ... receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a competing company, ... receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented