217 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16858433)
1. A comparison of accommodation amplitudes in pseudophakic eyes measured with three different methods.
Nemeth G; Tsorbatzoglou A; Vamosi P; Sohajda Z; Berta A
Eye (Lond); 2008 Jan; 22(1):65-9. PubMed ID: 16858433
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Pseudophakic accommodation and pseudoaccommodation under physiological conditions measured with partial coherence interferometry.
Tsorbatzoglou A; Németh G; Máth J; Berta A
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2006 Aug; 32(8):1345-50. PubMed ID: 16863973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A randomized intraindividual comparison of the accommodative performance of the bag-in-the-lens intraocular lens in presbyopic eyes.
Cleary G; Spalton DJ; Gala KB
Am J Ophthalmol; 2010 Nov; 150(5):619-627.e1. PubMed ID: 20719298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Stimulus-driven versus pilocarpine-induced biometric changes in pseudophakic eyes.
Kriechbaum K; Findl O; Koeppl C; Menapace R; Drexler W
Ophthalmology; 2005 Mar; 112(3):453-9. PubMed ID: 15745773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Pseudophakic accommodation with 2 models of foldable intraocular lenses.
Vámosi P; Nemeth G; Berta A
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2006 Feb; 32(2):221-6. PubMed ID: 16564996
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Objective accommodative amplitude and dynamics with the 1CU accommodative intraocular lens.
Wolffsohn JS; Hunt OA; Naroo S; Gilmartin B; Shah S; Cunliffe IA; Benson MT; Mantry S
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2006 Mar; 47(3):1230-5. PubMed ID: 16505063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of 6-month results of implantation of the 1CU accommodative intraocular lens with conventional intraocular lenses.
Küchle M; Seitz B; Langenbucher A; Gusek-Schneider GC; Martus P; Nguyen NX;
Ophthalmology; 2004 Feb; 111(2):318-24. PubMed ID: 15019382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Age-related behavior of posterior chamber lenses in myopic phakic eyes during accommodation measured by anterior segment partial coherence interferometry.
Lege BA; Haigis W; Neuhann TF; Bauer MH
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2006 Jun; 32(6):999-1006. PubMed ID: 16814059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Theoretical and measured pseudophakic accommodation after implantation of a new accommodative posterior chamber intraocular lens.
Langenbucher A; Seitz B; Huber S; Nguyen NX; Kuchle M
Arch Ophthalmol; 2003 Dec; 121(12):1722-7. PubMed ID: 14662592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Pilot study of new focus-shift accommodating intraocular lens.
Cleary G; Spalton DJ; Marshall J
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2010 May; 36(5):762-70. PubMed ID: 20457367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Spherical aberration and depth of focus in eyes implanted with aspheric and spherical intraocular lenses: a prospective randomized study.
Rocha KM; Soriano ES; Chamon W; Chalita MR; Nosé W
Ophthalmology; 2007 Nov; 114(11):2050-4. PubMed ID: 17445897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Visual and accommodative outcomes 1 year after implantation of an accommodating intraocular lens based on a new concept.
Alió JL; Ben-nun J; Rodríguez-Prats JL; Plaza AB
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2009 Oct; 35(10):1671-8. PubMed ID: 19781458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Accommodation in pseudophakic eyes with the 1CU accommodative intraocular lens].
Wang J; Fu J; Wang NL; Kang HJ; Yang WL
Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 2005 Sep; 41(9):807-11. PubMed ID: 16191347
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Fellow eye comparison between the 1CU accommodative intraocular lens and the Acrysof MA30 monofocal intraocular lens.
Heatley CJ; Spalton DJ; Hancox J; Kumar A; Marshall J
Am J Ophthalmol; 2005 Aug; 140(2):207-13. PubMed ID: 15992754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Dynamic stimulation of accommodation.
Ehmer A; Mannsfeld A; Auffarth GU; Holzer MP
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2008 Dec; 34(12):2024-9. PubMed ID: 19027554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Objective measurement of intraocular lens movement and dioptric change with a focus shift accommodating intraocular lens.
Hancox J; Spalton D; Heatley C; Jayaram H; Marshall J
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2006 Jul; 32(7):1098-103. PubMed ID: 16857494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity: AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive versus AcrySof SA60AT monofocal intraocular lenses.
Vingolo EM; Grenga P; Iacobelli L; Grenga R
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2007 Jul; 33(7):1244-7. PubMed ID: 17586381
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Subjective and objective performance of the Lenstec KH-3500 "accommodative" intraocular lens.
Wolffsohn JS; Naroo SA; Motwani NK; Shah S; Hunt OA; Mantry S; Sira M; Cunliffe IA; Benson MT
Br J Ophthalmol; 2006 Jun; 90(6):693-6. PubMed ID: 16531421
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Anterior chamber depth measurements in eyes with an accommodating intraocular lens: agreement between partial coherence interferometry and optical coherence tomography.
Cleary G; Spalton DJ; Marshall J
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2010 May; 36(5):790-8. PubMed ID: 20457371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of total higher-order aberrations on accommodation in pseudophakic eyes.
Nishi T; Nawa Y; Ueda T; Masuda K; Taketani F; Hara Y
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2006 Oct; 32(10):1643-9. PubMed ID: 17010861
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
