4.3 Article

Straylight measurements as an indication for cataract surgery

Journal

JOURNAL OF CATARACT AND REFRACTIVE SURGERY
Volume 38, Issue 5, Pages 840-848

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.11.048

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Landelijke Stichting voor Blinden en Slechtzienden, Utrecht
  2. Rotterdamse Vereniging Blindenbelangen, Rotterdam
  3. Stichting Blinden-penning, Amsterdam
  4. Stichting Nederlands Oogheelkundig Onderzoek, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PURPOSE: To assess adding straylight measurements to the indication for cataract surgery. SETTING: Onze Lieve Vrouwe Hospital, Amsterdam, and Zonnestraal Eye Clinic, Hilversum, The Netherlands. DESIGN: Prospective interventional cohort study. METHODS: Before and after cataract extraction, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) and straylight were recorded in all patients. Subjective complaints were documented by the 39-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-39) and a straylight questionnaire. RESULTS: The population comprised 217 patients with a mean age of 72 years +/- 9.12 (SD) (range 29 to 90 years). Preoperatively, the mean straylight was 1.55 +/- 0.29 log(s) and the mean CDVA, 0.28 +/- 0.21 logMAR. Visual acuity and straylight showed little correlation (R-2 = 0.08). The mean postoperative improvement in CDVA was 0.26 +/- 0.20 logMAR (range -0.12 to 1.12 logMAR) and in straylight, 0.31 +/- 0.32 log(s) (range -0.50 to 1.27 log[s]). The preoperative breakeven point (50% chance of postoperative improvement) was 0.06 logMAR for CDVA and 1.29 log(s) for straylight. Preoperative and postoperative questionnaires showed straylight had almost the same influence as visual acuity on quality of vision. CONCLUSIONS: Stray light and visual acuity measure different aspects of quality of vision and influenced subjective visual quality almost equally. When straylight was added to preoperative considerations of cataract extraction, postoperative results were more predictable.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available