Prospective Randomized Multicenter Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes of V4c and V5 Implantable Collamer Lenses: A Contralateral Eye Study
Purpose. To compare the visual and refractive outcomes and night vision performance questionnaire results between V4c and V5 implantable Collamer lenses in a prospective, randomized, multicenter study. Settings. Four refractive surgery centers. Design. Prospective randomized multicenter single-maske...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Hindawi Limited
2018-01-01
|
Series: | Journal of Ophthalmology |
Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/7623829 |
id |
doaj-59e728ee5e3f427aa7219ff672dae26f |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-59e728ee5e3f427aa7219ff672dae26f2020-11-24T22:31:23ZengHindawi LimitedJournal of Ophthalmology2090-004X2090-00582018-01-01201810.1155/2018/76238297623829Prospective Randomized Multicenter Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes of V4c and V5 Implantable Collamer Lenses: A Contralateral Eye StudyTakashi Kojima0Yoshihiro Kitazawa1Tomoaki Nakamura2Masahide Takahashi3Kazutaka Kamiya4Kazuo Ichikawa5Akihito Igarashi6Kimiya Shimizu7Nagoya Eye Clinic, Nagoya, JapanKobe Kanagawa Eye Clinic, Tokyo, JapanNagoya Eye Clinic, Nagoya, JapanSchool of Allied Health Sciences, Kitasato University, Kanagawa, JapanSchool of Allied Health Sciences, Kitasato University, Kanagawa, JapanChukyo Eye Clinic, Nagoya, JapanDepartment of Ophthalmology, Sanno Hospital, Tokyo, JapanDepartment of Ophthalmology, Sanno Hospital, Tokyo, JapanPurpose. To compare the visual and refractive outcomes and night vision performance questionnaire results between V4c and V5 implantable Collamer lenses in a prospective, randomized, multicenter study. Settings. Four refractive surgery centers. Design. Prospective randomized multicenter single-masked comparative study. Methods. Twenty-three patients were enrolled in this study. A conventional V4c model (EVO Visian ICL) was implanted in one eye, and a V5 model (EVO+ Visian ICL), which has a larger optic diameter than the V4c model, was implanted in the contralateral eye. The uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) were evaluated before and 6 months after surgery. At 6 months after surgery, a questionnaire on night vision disturbances was administered. The efficacy, safety, and predictability of the two implanted ICL models were compared. Results. There were no significant differences in the postoperative UDVA and CDVA between the two ICL models. The mean efficacy indexes for the V4c and V5 lenses were 1.16 ± 0.22 and 1.03 ± 0.23, respectively. The mean safety indexes of the V4c and V5 lenses were 1.21 ± 0.20 and 1.19 ± 0.20, respectively. The night vision performance questionnaire revealed that 7 patients (37%) noticed a difference in visual performance between the eyes, and all of them reported that they could see better at night with the V5-implanted eye compared with the V4c-implanted eye. Conclusion. The V4c and V5 ICL models achieved similar visual and refractive outcomes, whereas the V5 model showed a possible advantage in reducing night vision disturbances.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/7623829 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Takashi Kojima Yoshihiro Kitazawa Tomoaki Nakamura Masahide Takahashi Kazutaka Kamiya Kazuo Ichikawa Akihito Igarashi Kimiya Shimizu |
spellingShingle |
Takashi Kojima Yoshihiro Kitazawa Tomoaki Nakamura Masahide Takahashi Kazutaka Kamiya Kazuo Ichikawa Akihito Igarashi Kimiya Shimizu Prospective Randomized Multicenter Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes of V4c and V5 Implantable Collamer Lenses: A Contralateral Eye Study Journal of Ophthalmology |
author_facet |
Takashi Kojima Yoshihiro Kitazawa Tomoaki Nakamura Masahide Takahashi Kazutaka Kamiya Kazuo Ichikawa Akihito Igarashi Kimiya Shimizu |
author_sort |
Takashi Kojima |
title |
Prospective Randomized Multicenter Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes of V4c and V5 Implantable Collamer Lenses: A Contralateral Eye Study |
title_short |
Prospective Randomized Multicenter Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes of V4c and V5 Implantable Collamer Lenses: A Contralateral Eye Study |
title_full |
Prospective Randomized Multicenter Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes of V4c and V5 Implantable Collamer Lenses: A Contralateral Eye Study |
title_fullStr |
Prospective Randomized Multicenter Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes of V4c and V5 Implantable Collamer Lenses: A Contralateral Eye Study |
title_full_unstemmed |
Prospective Randomized Multicenter Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes of V4c and V5 Implantable Collamer Lenses: A Contralateral Eye Study |
title_sort |
prospective randomized multicenter comparison of the clinical outcomes of v4c and v5 implantable collamer lenses: a contralateral eye study |
publisher |
Hindawi Limited |
series |
Journal of Ophthalmology |
issn |
2090-004X 2090-0058 |
publishDate |
2018-01-01 |
description |
Purpose. To compare the visual and refractive outcomes and night vision performance questionnaire results between V4c and V5 implantable Collamer lenses in a prospective, randomized, multicenter study. Settings. Four refractive surgery centers. Design. Prospective randomized multicenter single-masked comparative study. Methods. Twenty-three patients were enrolled in this study. A conventional V4c model (EVO Visian ICL) was implanted in one eye, and a V5 model (EVO+ Visian ICL), which has a larger optic diameter than the V4c model, was implanted in the contralateral eye. The uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) were evaluated before and 6 months after surgery. At 6 months after surgery, a questionnaire on night vision disturbances was administered. The efficacy, safety, and predictability of the two implanted ICL models were compared. Results. There were no significant differences in the postoperative UDVA and CDVA between the two ICL models. The mean efficacy indexes for the V4c and V5 lenses were 1.16 ± 0.22 and 1.03 ± 0.23, respectively. The mean safety indexes of the V4c and V5 lenses were 1.21 ± 0.20 and 1.19 ± 0.20, respectively. The night vision performance questionnaire revealed that 7 patients (37%) noticed a difference in visual performance between the eyes, and all of them reported that they could see better at night with the V5-implanted eye compared with the V4c-implanted eye. Conclusion. The V4c and V5 ICL models achieved similar visual and refractive outcomes, whereas the V5 model showed a possible advantage in reducing night vision disturbances. |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/7623829 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT takashikojima prospectiverandomizedmulticentercomparisonoftheclinicaloutcomesofv4candv5implantablecollamerlensesacontralateraleyestudy AT yoshihirokitazawa prospectiverandomizedmulticentercomparisonoftheclinicaloutcomesofv4candv5implantablecollamerlensesacontralateraleyestudy AT tomoakinakamura prospectiverandomizedmulticentercomparisonoftheclinicaloutcomesofv4candv5implantablecollamerlensesacontralateraleyestudy AT masahidetakahashi prospectiverandomizedmulticentercomparisonoftheclinicaloutcomesofv4candv5implantablecollamerlensesacontralateraleyestudy AT kazutakakamiya prospectiverandomizedmulticentercomparisonoftheclinicaloutcomesofv4candv5implantablecollamerlensesacontralateraleyestudy AT kazuoichikawa prospectiverandomizedmulticentercomparisonoftheclinicaloutcomesofv4candv5implantablecollamerlensesacontralateraleyestudy AT akihitoigarashi prospectiverandomizedmulticentercomparisonoftheclinicaloutcomesofv4candv5implantablecollamerlensesacontralateraleyestudy AT kimiyashimizu prospectiverandomizedmulticentercomparisonoftheclinicaloutcomesofv4candv5implantablecollamerlensesacontralateraleyestudy |
_version_ |
1725737416665333760 |