title: Comparison of 6-month results of implantation of the 1CU accommodative intraocular lens with conventional intraocular lenses.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate the clinical results of implantation of the new 1CU accommodative intraocular lens (IOL) in cataract patients and to compare results with those of conventional IOLs.
  
  
  METHODS
  Nonrandomized comparative trial.
  
  
  METHODS
  Twenty eyes of 20 patients (mean age = 65.8+/-13.3 years) in the 1CU group and 20 eyes of 20 patients (mean age = 67.4+/-11.6 years) in the control group.
  
  
  METHODS
  All patients underwent phacoemulsification and IOL implantation. The 1CU accommodative lens was used in 20 eyes, and conventional IOLs (polymethyl methacrylate, hydrophilic or hydrophobic acrylate) were used in the control group. Patients were observed prospectively, and 6-month data were analyzed.
  
  
  METHODS
  Accommodative ranges determined by 3 different methods (near point, defocusing, and retinoscopy). Secondary outcome measures were (1) increase of anterior chamber depth after topical application of 1% cyclopentolate eyedrops and (2) distance-corrected near visual acuity with Birkhäuser reading charts at 35 cm.
  
  
  RESULTS
  We observed a higher accommodative range with all 3 methods (mean = 1.83+/-0.49 vs. 1.16+/-0.27 diopters [D] [near point], 1.85+/-0.43 vs. 0.64+/-0.21 D [defocusing], and 0.98+/-0.55 vs. 0.17+/-0.22 D [retinoscopy]), a larger increase of anterior chamber depth after cyclopentolate eyedrops (mean = 0.42+/-0.18 vs. 0.11+/-0.06 mm), and better distance-corrected near visual acuity (median = 0.4 vs. 0.2) in the 1CU group relative to the control group. All differences between the 2 groups were statistically highly significant (P<0.001).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In the present study, the 1CU accommodative IOL showed increased accommodative range and better near visual acuity than a control group with conventional IOLs. Further research is necessary to confirm these results in masked, randomized, prospective studies and to confirm further the accommodative power of this group of new IOLs.
authors.affiliation: Department of Ophthalmology and University Eye Hospital, University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany. Prof.Kuechle@augenaerzte-erlangen.de
authors.forename: Michael
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Küchle
authors.forename: Berthold
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Seitz
authors.forename: Achim
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Langenbucher
authors.forename: Gabriele C
authors.initials: GC
authors.lastname: Gusek-Schneider
authors.forename: Peter
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Martus
authors.forename: Nhung X
authors.initials: NX
authors.lastname: Nguyen
mesh_terms: D000065:Accommodation, Ocular / Q000502:physiology*; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001672:Biocompatible Materials; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D019654:Lens Implantation, Intraocular; D007910:Lenses, Intraocular; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D018918:Phacoemulsification; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D019591:Pseudophakia / Q000503:physiopathology*; D012449:Safety; D014792:Visual Acuity / Q000502:physiology*
chemical_list: D001672:Biocompatible Materials