{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.035438144329896906, 'fraction_numerical': 0.028350515463917526, 'mean_word_length': 5.1141732283464565, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Retinal straylight and complaint scores 18 months after implantation of the AcrySof monofocal and ReSTOR diffractive intraocular lenses.

PURPOSE
To evaluate retinal straylight and patient complaint scores 18 months after implantation with the AcrySof ReSTOR diffractive multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) (Alcon Laboratories Inc).


METHODS
Retinal straylight was measured with the C-Quant (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH) system in 40 eyes implanted with the AcrySof ReSTOR IOL (SA60D3) and in 40 eyes implanted with the AcrySof SA60AT monofocal IOL. Complaint scores were assessed by a questionnaire in both groups of patients at three different lighting conditions--day light, dimmed light, and at night.


RESULTS
Seventy-five percent of eyes (30/40) of the ReSTOR group and 80% of eyes (32/40) of the SA60AT control group showed a retinal straylight value within or better than the normal range. No statistically significant differences between groups were found (P = .790). Patients of the ReSTOR group showed significantly more complaint scores at all assessed lighting conditions: increasing factors were 1.53, 2.02, and 2.66, for day light, dimmed light, and night, respectively (P < .0001). Comparing the amount of straylight, the multifocal group had 20% more straylight, albeit not significant at the 1% level.


CONCLUSIONS
The AcrySof ReSTOR IOL showed similar retinal straylight values compared to the monofocal IOL. Subjectively, patients with the diffractive IOL claimed significantly more glare for all light conditions, especially at night.