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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Takashi Kojima, Yoshihiro Kitazawa, Tomoaki Nakamura, Masahide Takahashi, Kazutaka Kamiya, Kazuo Ichikawa, Akihito Igarashi, Kimiya Shimizu
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