Efficacy and safety of multifocal intraocular lenses following cataract and refractive lens exchange: Metaanalysis of peer-reviewed publications

Non-diffractive wavefront shaping extended depth of focus (EDoF) intraocular lens: visual performance and patient-reported outcome

PURPOSE

To evaluate visual performance and patient-reported outcomes after bilateral implantation of new non-diffractive wavefront shaping extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL).

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany.

DESIGN

Prospective, single-arm, single-center study.

METHODS

Patient population: We included 16 patients (32 eyes) who received bilateral implantation of a non-diffractive wavefront shaping EDOF IOL (AcrySof® IQ Vivity®, Alcon Research, TX, USA). Target refraction in both eyes was emmetropia. Observation procedure: Monocular and binocular uncorrected (UCVA) and distance-corrected (DCVA) visual acuity (VA), refractive outcome, defocus curve, contrast sensitivity (CS) were evaluated 3 months after surgery with a questionnaire on optical phenomena and spectacle independence. Main Outcome measure: Three months postoperative monocular and binocular UCVA and DCVA (logMAR); defocus curve; CS; and quality of vision (QoV) questionnaire results.

RESULTS

Mean spherical equivalent was -0.16 ± 0.37 D 3 month postoperatively. Binocular UDVA at distance, intermediate, and near was 0.01 ± 0.05 logMAR at 4m, 0.05 ± 0.05 logMAR at 80cm, 0.07 ± 0.06 logMAR at 66cm, and 0.25 ± 0.11 logMAR at 40cm, respectively. Despite some minor optical phenomena, 88% of patients would choose the same lens. 63% of patients reported no optical phenomena at all. Contrast sensitivity was 1.25 ± 0.41 logCS (photopic), 0.96 ± 0.24 logCS (mesopic) and 0.93 ± 0.24 (mesopic + glare).

CONCLUSIONS

This non-diffractive wavefront shaping EDOF IOL provides good VA at far and intermediate distance and functional near VA. It showed good QoV and CS, and high spectacle independence for distance and intermediate vision with significantly less optical phenomena than with other EDOF or MIOLs.

Bilateral Refractive Lens Exchange With Trifocal Intraocular Lens for Hyperopia in Patients Younger Than 40 Years: A Case-Control Study

PURPOSE

To evaluate visual outcomes, satisfaction, and spectacle independence in non-presbyopic hyperopic patients who underwent bilateral refractive lens exchange with a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) and to compare them with presbyopic hyperopic patients.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, patients younger than 40 years underwent bilateral refractive lens exchange with a diffractive trifocal IOL (FineVision Micro F; PhysIOL SA) for hyperopia with at least 3 months of follow-up. A control group of patients older than 50 years was matched by axial length, sex, and follow-up. Safety, efficacy, predictability, patient satisfaction, and spectacle independence were evaluated.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-three patients (average age = 36.94 ± 2.91 years; range = 21.50 to 40 years) were included in this study. After a mean follow-up of 8.83 ± 5.69 months (range = 2.75 to 77.63 months), the safety and efficacy indexes and predictability within ±1.00 diopters (D) were 1.02%, 0.98%, and 99.62%, respectively, which was not different from the control group (P > .05). No intraoperative complications were recorded. The only postoperative complication was posterior capsule opacification in 21 eyes (7.89%), which was similar to the control group (P > .05). Ninety-seven percent of patients in each group expressed that they were satisfied and all of them in each group reported that they did not use spectacles for distance, intermediate, or near vision.

CONCLUSIONS

Refractive lens exchange and trifocal IOL implantation for hyperopia in patients without presbyopia provided the same good visual outcomes as in presbyopic patients with a high rate of patient satisfaction and spectacle independence. [J Refract Surg. 2021;37(8):524-531.].

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes, Visual Quality and Visual Function of Two Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses Made from the Same Material, but with Different Design and Optics

This semi-prospective, parallel, comparative investigation evaluated the clinical outcomes and quality of vision (contrast sensitivity, visual function, dysphotopsia, spectacle use, overall satisfaction) after mono- or bilateral implantation of two presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOL)—the Liberty^® 677MY or the AT LISA^® tri 839M—in 50 eyes of 25 cataract patients. Clinical outcomes were assessed 3 and 12 months postoperatively. Eighty-nine percent of eyes implanted with the Liberty IOL and 59% of eyes implanted with the AT LISA IOL achieved a refractive outcome ±0.5 diopters of the target (emmetropia). Refractive outcomes were stable with both lenses. The proportions of eyes with 20/20 uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and 20/20 uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) were higher in the Liberty group than in the AT LISA group (UDVA: 56% vs. 41%; UNVA: 83% vs. 66%). Optical quality assessment results were comparable for the two IOLs. Superior photopic contrast sensitivity was found with the Liberty lens. The rate of Nd:YAG capsulotomy at the 12-month follow-up was 16.7% in the Liberty group and 40.6% for the AT LISA IOL. Considering that both lenses are made from the same material, we propose that the noted differences in clinical outcomes may derive from differences in design and optical surface between the two IOLs.

Comparative analysis of visual outcome with three intraocular lenses: monofocal, enhanced monofocal, and extended range of vision

PURPOSE

To compare the visual performance, spectacle independence and subjective visual quality of three intraocular lenses (IOLs): monofocal, enhanced monofocal, and extended range of vision.

SETTING

Ophthalmology Department, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.

DESIGN

Prospective case series.

METHODS

We included patients without ocular comorbidities and corneal astigmatism <0.75 diopters (D) undergoing cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of: monofocal Tecnis ZCB00, enhanced monofocal Eyhance ICB00, and extended range of vision Symfony ZXR00. Six months postoperatively we analyzed the following parameters: subjective and objective refraction; monocular and binocular corrected distance (4 m) and uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA); corrected distance, intermediate (66 cm) and near (40 cm) visual acuity, as well as uncorrected intermediate (UIVA) and uncorrected near (UNVA) visual acuity; photopic contrast sensitivity, binocular defocus curve; halo and glare perception; spectacle independence.

RESULTS

We evaluated 150 eyes of 75 patients (25 patients per IOL group). Monocular and binocular UDVA was excellent in all three groups. Eyhance achieved binocular UIVA similar to that of Symfony, the latter showing the highest binocular UNVA. The defocus curves at -1 D were equivalent for both Eyhance and Symfony, whereas contrast sensitivity was similar in all three groups. The Eyhance spectacle independence score was comparable to Symfony's for intermediate-distance activities, the latter however achieving the worst results for halos and glare.

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced monofocal Eyhance was not inferior to Symfony as regards intermediate-distance visual outcome and spectacle independence, also providing lower subjective perception of halos and glare.

Visual outcomes of binocular implantation of a new extended depth of focus intraocular lens

Purpose:

To evaluate the visual outcomes of bilateral implantation of a new hydrophobic foldable extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL.

Methods:

All cases undergoing phacoemulsification with bilateral implantation of Supraphob Infocus IOL between December 2017 and July 2018 at a tertiary eye care center were recruited in this prospective interventional study. The primary outcome measures were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), and uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA). Postoperative follow-up was done on day 1, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months.

Results:

One hundred and four eyes of 52 patients with a mean age of 58.4 ± 9.3 years were included. The mean UDVA improved from 0.84 ± 0.32 logMAR preoperatively to 0.11 ± 0.08 logMAR at 3 months following surgery. At the final follow-up, the binocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA was 0.03 ± 0.07, 0.14 ± 0.06, and 0.36 ± 0.05 logMAR, respectively. The mean CS was 1.47 ± 0.06 logCS. The distance and near stereopsis was 90.2 ± 24.8 s of arc (arcsec) and 62.5 ± 19.4 arcsec, respectively. The mean total higher-order aberration (HOA), point spread function, and modulation transfer function were 0.30 ± 0.13, 0.07 ± 0.08, and 0.26 ± 0.07, respectively.

Conclusion:

The Supraphob Infocus EDOF IOL provides good unaided visual acuity for distance, intermediate, and near along with a high quality of vision as assessed by contrast sensitivity, HOAs, and stereoacuity. It may be a potential alternative to the currently available EDOF IOLs in providing good visual acuity at variable distances.

Visual and Refractive Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction Following Implantation of Monofocal IOL in One Eye and ERV IOL in the Contralateral Eye with Mini-Monovision

Title

Visual and refractive outcomes and patient satisfaction following implantation of monofocal intraocular lens in one eye and ERV intraocular lens in the contralateral eye with mini-monovision.

Purpose

To evaluate the outcomes following implantation of monofocal intraocular lens in one eye and ERV intraocular lens in the contralateral eye with mini-monovision.

Methods

Twenty-five subjects underwent bilateral cataract surgery, wherein the dominant eye received monofocal Tecnis-1 IOL, while in the contralateral eye received the Tecnis Symphony ERV IOL. The dominant eye was targeted for emmetropia and the non-dominant eye for myopia of −0.50 to −0.75D. Binocular uncorrected and corrected distance (UDVA, CDVA), intermediate (UIVA, CIVA), and near (UNVA, DCNVA) visual acuity; reading speeds, defocus curve and contrast sensitivity were studied at 6 months post-operatively.

Results

At 6 months post-operatively the mean binocular UDVA, CDVA, UNVA and DCNVA were 0.007±0.07, −0.13±0.06, 0.26±0.09 and 0.44±0.10 LogMAR, respectively. Binocular UIVA and DCIVA at 60 cm were 0.22±0.10 and 0.18±0.08 LogMAR and at 80 cm was 0.16±0.11 and 0.15±0.10 LogMAR, respectively. Mean uncorrected reading speeds evaluated with SRD at 40, 60 and 80 cm were 114.4±6.9, 126.4±7.9 and 123.16±5.8 words per minute. Contrast sensitivity values did not show significant difference for any spatial frequency tested. At 6 months, only 12% (3 patients) reported mild halos. Spectacle independence satisfaction scores were 96%, 100% and 88% for distance, intermediate and near.

Conclusion

Implantation of monofocal intraocular lens in one eye and ERV intraocular lens in the contralateral with mini-monovision resulted in good outcomes for far and intermediate, and satisfactory outcomes for near vision, with good tolerance to mini-monovision at the end of 6 months.

Visual outcomes and patient satisfaction after implantation of a presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens that combines EDOF and Multifocal profiles

PURPOSE

To evaluate clinical outcomes delivered by a new hybrid presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens: Tecnis Synergy ZFR00V IOL model (Johnson & Johnson Vision) SETTING:: Hospital da Luz Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal DESIGN:: Prospective observational study METHODS:: A total of 27 patients undergoing bilateral IOL implantation were included. Visual acuity (VA) was measured for far distance, intermediate (66 cm) and near (40 cm) vision under both photopic and mesopic conditions. In addition, at the 3-month follow-up visit, the defocus curve was obtained for binocular vision and questionnaires were administered to measure spectacle-independence and level of satisfaction (QoV and Catquest-SF9) with the surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

At 3-month follow-up, under photopic conditions, VA values were: CDVA = -0.02 ± 0.07, DCIVA = 0.03 ± 0.11, and DCNVA = 0.00 ± 0.08, while under mesopic conditions, VA values were: CDVA = -0.01 ± 0.05, and DCNVA = 0.07 ± 0.09. The binocular defocus curve revealed that mean visual acuity was better than 0.30 LogMAR within the +1.00 D to -4.00 D interval, and better than 0.10 LogMAR between +0.50 D and -3.00 D. All patients achieved distance-vision spectacle freedom, while 3.7% of them said they used them in certain intermediate- or near-vision situations. As much as 88% of the patients reported being fairly satisfied or very satisfied.

CONCLUSIONS

The Tecnis Synergy ZFR00V intraocular lens model used for cataract surgery is capable of restoring visual function while providing very good intermediate and near vision, under both photopic and mesopic conditions, resulting in a high level of patient satisfaction.

Comparison of trifocal or hybrid multifocal-extended depth of focus intraocular lenses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes following implantation of trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) or a hybrid multifocal-extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL in cataract or refractive lens exchange surgeries. We examined 13 comparative studies with bilateral implantation of trifocal (898 eyes) or hybrid multifocal-EDOF (624 eyes) IOLs published through 1 March 2020. Better uncorrected and corrected near visual acuity (VA) were observed in the trifocal group (MD: − 0.143, 95% CI: − 0.192 to − 0.010, P < 0.001 and MD: − 0.149, 95% CI: − 0.217 to − 0.082, P < 0.001, respectively), while the hybrid multifocal-EDOF group presented better uncorrected intermediate VA (MD: 0.055, 95% CI: 0.016 to 0.093, P = 0.005). Trifocal IOLs were more likely to achieve spectacle independence at near distance (RR: 1.103, 95% CI: 1.036 to 1.152, P = 0.002). The halo photic effect was generated more frequently by the trifocal IOLs (RR: 1.318, 95% CI: 1.025 to 1.696, P = 0.031). Contrast sensitivity and subjective visual quality yielded comparable results between groups. Trifocal IOLs demonstrated better performance at near distance but apparently led to more photic disturbances. Our findings provided the most up-to-date and comprehensive evidence by comparing the benefits of advanced IOLs in clinical practice.

Visual outcome, optical quality, and patient satisfaction with a new monofocal IOL, enhanced for intermediate vision: preliminary results

PURPOSE

To compare visual outcomes, contrast sensitivity, optical quality, spectacle independence, and visual disturbances in patients implanted with 2 models of monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs).

SETTING

Eye Clinic, Department of NEUROFARBA, University of Florence, Italy.

DESIGN

Prospective case series METHODS:: Patients without ocular comorbidities and corneal astigmatism less than 0.75 diopters (D) had cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of either of 2 monofocal IOLs, the Tecnis ZCB00 or the Tecnis Eyhance ICB00 (Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc.). Six months postoperatively, monocular and binocular uncorrected and corrected (at 4 m) distance visual acuities, as well as uncorrected (UIVA), distance corrected, and corrected intermediate (at 66 cm) and near (at 40 cm) visual acuities were measured. Photopic contrast sensitivity, binocular defocus curve, objective scatter index (OSI), Strehl ratio, modulation transfer function (MTF) cutoff, halo and glare perception, and spectacle independence were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 80 eyes of 40 patients were evaluated in this study. Although monocular and binocular uncorrected and corrected distance and near visual acuities were similar between groups, monocular and binocular UIVA were significantly higher in the Eyhance group. There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of photopic contrast sensitivity, OSI, MTF cutoff, Strehl ratio, and glare and halo perception. The ICB00 IOL provided better spectacle independence than the ZCB00 IOL for intermediate distance.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients without ocular comorbidities, the Eyhance ICB00 IOL provided better UIVA and higher intermediate spectacle independence without impairment of far vision and visual quality, compared with the ZCB00 IOL.

Refractive Lens Exchange in Hyperopic Presbyopes with the Acrysof IQ Panoptix Intraocular Lens: One-Year Results and Analysis of the Literature

Purpose

To assess the functional and refractive outcomes in hyperopia and presbyopia correction by clear lens exchange with the intraocular trifocal artificial lens (IOL) Acrysof IQ Panoptix implant at 1 year.

Materials and Methods

A number of 128 eyes (64 patients) underwent clear lens exchange with placement of the trifocal IOL Acrysof IQ Panoptix implant for hyperopia and presbyopia. Prior to the surgery the patients had a complete ocular examination. In all cases the artificial lens was implanted in the bag without any intraoperative complications. Visual acuity (VA) at distance, intermediate and near and ocular refraction were evaluated at 4 weeks, 6 and 12 months postoperatively.

Results

The mean age was 53.49 ±7.377 years old (range 40–73 years). As high as 51.57% of the patients were males and 48.43% were females. The mean achieved refraction was 0.26 ± 0.73D. Almost 60.93% of patients were within ±0.25D of the target refraction, with 82.03% eyes within ±0.50D of the planned correction. At 1 year after surgery, 96.45% of eyes had a stable refraction (p >0.05). At 1 year, a total of 92.25%, 89.92% and 91.47% achieved a monocular uncorrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuity of 0.2 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution or better, respectively. At the same time point, a total of 95.35%, 91.47% and 93.80% achieved a binocular uncorrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuity of 0.2 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution or better, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference (p>0.05) between the postoperative uncorrected and best corrected VA (distance, intermediate, near) at 6 months and postoperative uncorrected and best corrected VA (distance, intermediate, near) at 12 months. None of our patients had any intraoperative complications. Two cases (1.56%) developed posterior capsule opacification. Twelve patients (18.75%) complained about photic phenomena such as glare and haloes, but this symptom disappeared after 6 months postoperatively. As high as93.56% of patients had a high satisfaction with the outcomes of the surgery. Spectacle independence was obtained in 97.65% eyes.

Conclusion

The Acrysof Panoptix trifocal artificial lens offers a good vision at distance, intermediate and near, with a good quality of vision and refraction.

Corneal Topography for Intraocular Lens Selection in Refractive Cataract Surgery

The purpose of this review is to evaluate the usefulness of corneal topography to select premium intraocular lenses (IOLs), including aspherical IOLs, toric IOLs, and multifocal IOLs, in refractive cataract surgery. Corneal topography can detect corneal regular astigmatism, corneal irregular astigmatism (higher-order aberrations [HOAs]) including spherical aberration, and corneal shape abnormalities after corneal refractive surgery. Surgeons can explain to the patients with significant corneal HOAs about its effect on postoperative visual function before surgery. Multifocal IOLs should not be selected for such eyes. For eyes with abnormal corneal shape, appropriate IOL power calculation formulae can be applied. In the case of toric IOLs, regular astigmatism and corneal HOAs should be checked. Before implanting an aspheric IOL, it is ideal to confirm spherical aberration of the cornea is not below the normal range. Because corneal HOAs, abnormal corneal shape after corneal refractive surgery, corneal regular astigmatism, and corneal spherical aberration increase postoperative refractive errors and poor vision quality with premium IOLs, corneal topography before cataract surgery is helpful in screening patients who are not appropriate candidates for premium IOLs.

Comparative Analysis of Visual Performance and Astigmatism Tolerance with Monofocal, Bifocal, and Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lenses Targeting Slight Myopia

Purpose

To compare the visual performance and astigmatism tolerance of 3 intraocular lens (IOL) groups: monofocal, bifocal, and extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) IOLs targeting slight myopia.

Methods

Overall, there were 60 cataract surgery eyes from 60 patients with implantation of a monofocal, bifocal, or EDOF IOL (20 eyes in each IOL group). The EDOF IOLs targeted slight myopia (−0.25 D to −0.75 D). Intragroup comparison of visual acuity, defocus curve, objective optical quality, contrast sensitivity, visual function questionnaire scores, patients' overall satisfaction, and the astigmatism tolerance was performed 3 months after surgery.

Results

The EDOF group provided equivalently excellent distance visual outcomes (0.06 ± 0.12) as the monofocal (0.06 ± 0.09) and bifocal (0.03 ± 0.09) groups (P=0.554), better intermediate vision than the other 2 groups (P < 0.05), and similarly satisfactory near visual outcomes (0.23 ± 0.16 at 20 cm, and 0.17 ± 0.14 at 33 cm) as the bifocal group (0.28 ± 0.14 at 20 cm and 0.08 ± 0.10 at 33 cm) (P > 0.05). The contrast sensitivity of EDOF IOL was slightly decreased compared to that of monofocal IOL, but it was better than that of bifocal IOL. The EDOF group showed significantly higher satisfaction than the bifocal group did when preoperative corneal astigmatism was 0.75 D or greater (P=0.009). A significant negative correlation between the corneal astigmatism and patient satisfaction was observed in only the bifocal group.

Conclusions

The EDOF IOLs targeting slight myopia offered satisfactory visual outcomes at an extended range from far to near distances. The EDOF and monofocal IOLs showed a better tolerance to astigmatism than did the bifocal IOL.

Presbyopic refractive lens exchange with trifocal intraocular lens implantation after corneal laser vision correction: Refractive results and biometry analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the refractive and biometry results of presbyopic refractive lens exchange (RLE) with trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in eyes with previous myopic or hyperopic corneal laser vision correction (LVC).

SETTINGS

Memira AS, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

The refractive results included the manifest refraction spherical equivalent, uncorrected near (UNVA) and distance (UDVA) visual acuities, corrected distance visual acuity, safety, efficacy, and precision. The biometry analysis included the refractive prediction error (RPE), median absolute error (MedAE), and percentage of eyes within a certain RPE range for the formulas from the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) online calculator.

RESULTS

The study comprised 241 eyes. Six months postoperatively, 60.0% of eyes were within ±0.25 diopter (D), 80.9% within ±0.50 D, and 97.9% within ±1.00 D of emmetropia. There were no statistical differences in the mean monocular UDVA (0.87 ± 0.20 [SD]), safety index (0.98 ± 0.09), or efficacy index (0.81 ± 0.18) between the myopic ablation group and hyperopic ablation group. Binocularly, 85% of patients had simultaneous UDVA and UNVA of 0.9 or better and Jaeger 3, respectively. The ASCRS online calculator formulas gave different performances for previous myopic and hyperopic ablation profiles. Using optimized constants and nomogram for correcting the mean RPE improved the MedAE.

CONCLUSIONS

Presbyopic RLE was safe and effective in selected cases with a history of LVC. The use of optimized IOL constants and nomograms can improve the refractive precision of lens-based refractive surgery.

A Comparative Evaluation of Diffractive Trifocal and New Refractive/Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses for Refractive Lens Exchange

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the visual performance and quality of life (QOL) associated with refractive/extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses (IOLs) and diffractive trifocal IOLs in refractive lens exchange patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a comparative interventional study of patients undergoing implantation of Lucidis (Swiss Advanced Vision, SAV‑IOL SA, Neuchâtel, Switzerland) or AT LISA tri 839MP (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Germany) IOLs. Near, intermediate, and distance best corrected and uncorrected visual acuities were collected at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. The vision-related QOL was evaluated 1 and 3 months after surgery, using the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-14 (VF-14 QOL questionnaire).

RESULTS

A total of 74 patients underwent refractive lens exchange and IOL implantation, with 38 patients in the EDOF group and 36 in the trifocal group. Among all visual acuities, uncorrected near visual acuity was statistically significantly better with the Lucidis IOL at the first month (p = .02) and diminished at the third-month visit (p = .16). When we compared the VF-14 QOL questionnaire scores, reading small print, reading a newspaper or book, and driving at night were statistically significantly better in the Lucidis group at the first month (p = .00, for each). That difference persisted only in driving at night at the third-month visit (p = .04). Reading small print, driving at night, and doing fine handwork were the most difficult tasks in the AT LISA group at the first month, and only driving at night remained so at the third-month visit.

CONCLUSIONS

The refractive results and visual outcomes at all distances of EDOF and trifocal IOLs were highly satisfactory. However, the EDOF design in the Lucidis IOL achieves lower rates of glare in the early period after refractive lens exchange.

Influence of extended depth of focus intraocular lenses on visual field sensitivity

Purpose

To investigate the influence of EDOF IOLs, TECNIS Symfony^® (Johnson & Johnson Surgical Vision, Inc.), on visual field sensitivity and to compare the IOLs with other kinds of IOLs.

Methods

The subjects included the normal fellow eyes of patients who underwent the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) 30–2 with Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm Fast within 6 months after cataract due to glaucoma or suspected glaucoma. Each parameter of HFA was compared among eyes implanted with TENIS Symfony^® (EDOF group), diffractive bifocal IOLs (bifocal group), and monofocal IOLs (monofocal group).

Results

The total of 76 eyes, including 24 eyes in the EDOF group, 26 eyes in the bifocal group, and 26 eyes in the monofocal group, were included in this study. Mean deviation (MD) of HFA was -0.24±0.58 dB in the EDOF group, -1.38±0.58 dB in the bifocal group, and 0.02±0.44 dB in the monofocal group. Foveal threshold (FT) of HFA was 35.8±1.6 dB in the EDOF group, 33.6±1.7 dB in the bifocal group, and 36.6±1.4 dB in the monofocal group. In both MD and FT, there was significant difference between the bifocal group and the others (p<0.001). There was no difference between the EDOF group and the monofocal group. Moreover, there was no significant difference between the three groups about pattern standard deviation (PSD) of HFA.

Conclusion

TECNIS Symfony^® may have little influence on visual field sensitivity, whereas diffractive bifocal IOLs decrease visual field sensitivity.

Defocus curves of 4 presbyopia-correcting IOL designs: Diffractive panfocal, diffractive trifocal, segmental refractive, and extended-depth-of-focus

PURPOSE

To evaluate the defocus curves of 4 presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs).

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany.

DESIGN

Prospective case series.

METHODS

Patients included in the study had bilateral surgery with implantation of diffractive panfocal, diffractive trifocal, segmental refractive (SegRef), or extended-depth-of-focus (EDOF) presbyopia-correcting IOLs. The uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuities, uncorrected intermediate and near visual acuities, distance-corrected intermediate (DCIVA) and near (DCNVA) visual acuities, defocus curve, and spectacle independence were measured.

RESULTS

The UDVA and CDVA were not significantly different between groups (P > .05); however, the EDOF group had worse near CDVA (P < .001). The trifocal and EDOF groups showed better DCIVA than the panfocal and SegRef group at 80 cm (P < .001); the EDOF and panfocal groups had comparable DCIVA at 60 cm (P > .05). Defocus curves showed no significant between-group differences from 4 m to 2 m (P > .05). The EDOF group had better visual acuity from 1 m to 67 cm than the trifocal and SegRef groups and better visual acuity than the panfocal group at 1 m (P > .05). Compared with the other IOLs, the panfocal IOL yielded significantly better visual acuity at 50 cm (P < .001) and the EDOF IOL worse visual acuity at 40 cm (P < .01). There was a significant difference in spectacle independence between the panfocal group and EDOF group (P < .05) but no difference between the other groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The 4 IOLs provided equally good CDVA. The EDOF IOL yielded slightly better DCIVA but worse DCNVA than the other IOLs. Only the panfocal IOL gave better DCIVA at 50 cm.

[Current Review: Multifocal Intraocular Lenses and Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses]

Presbyopia and cataract patients' wish to be increasingly independent of spectacles after surgery and this is one of the main drivers for the development of multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOL) and extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses (IOL). As education, biometry, diagnostics, surgical techniques, and MIOL/EDOF IOL designs have improved over the past decade, an increasing number of cataract surgeons have become cataract refractive surgeons to help address this need. There is not one single MIOL/EDOF IOL, however, that suits all patients' needs. The wide variety of MIOL and EDOF IOL, their optics, and their impact on our patients' quality of vision have to be fully understood if we have to choose the appropriate IOL for each individual; MIOL/EDOF IOL surgery has to be customized. This review article looks at the different optical aspects and clinical consequences of MIOL/EDOF IOL, in order to help surgeons find an appropriate solution for each of their individual patients.

Comparing the Effect of Monofocal and Multifocal Intraocular Lenses on Macular Surgery

Aim

To compare the effects of previously implanted monofocal and multifocal intraocular lenses (IOL) on macular surgery.

Methods

Seventy eyes of 70 patients with epiretinal membrane (ERM) and symptomatic vitromacular traction syndrome that previously had IOL implantation for cataract surgery were included in this prospective randomized clinical trial. Cases were divided into two groups. Group 1 and Group 2 were composed of eyes with monofocal and multifocal IOLs, respectively. The effects of refraction error and IOL decentration at the time of macular surgery performed for ERM and ILM peeling, according to the lens type, were investigated. Pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) was performed to peel ERM and ILM in all cases. Complete ophthalmological examination, fundus fluorescein angiography, and optical coherence tomography imaging were made to all cases, preoperatively and postoperatively.

Results

The mean BCVA in Group 1 and Group 2 improved from 0.69 ± 0.15 and 0.38 ± 0.14 logMAR to 0.40 ± 0.14 and 0.10 ± 0.04 logMAR, respectively, at the 6^th month. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of the mean spherical refraction error (P > 0.05) and IOL decentration level (P > 0.05). The mean time required for macular surgery in Group 2 was statistically significantly longer than that for Group 1 (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant relationship between IOL decentration and macular surgery time in Group 1 (P > 0.05), but there it was found in Group 2 (P < 0.05). In Group 2, there was a positive correlation between IOL decentration and macular surgery time.

Conclusion

In cases with multifocal IOL implants, especially with lens decentration, the time of macular surgery for ERM and ILM peeling during PPV is longer than that of eyes with monofocal IOL due to fluctuations in the clarity of the surgeon's view.

Refractive surgery beyond 2020

Refractive surgery refers to any procedure that corrects or minimizes refractive errors. Today, refractive surgery has evolved beyond the traditional laser refractive surgery, embodied by the popular laser in situ keratomileusis or 'LASIK'. New keratorefractive techniques such as small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) avoids corneal flap creation and uses a single laser device, while advances in surface ablation techniques have seen a resurgence in its popularity. Presbyopic treatment options have also expanded to include new ablation profiles, intracorneal implants, and phakic intraocular implants. With the improved safety and efficacy of refractive lens exchange, a wider variety of intraocular lens implants with advanced optics provide more options for refractive correction in carefully selected patients. In this review, we also discuss possible developments in refractive surgery beyond 2020, such as preoperative evaluation of refractive patients using machine learning and artificial intelligence, potential use of stromal lenticules harvested from SMILE for presbyopic treatments, and various advances in intraocular lens implants that may provide a closer to 'physiological correction' of refractive errors.

Trifocal diffractive intraocular lens implantation in patients after previous corneal refractive laser surgery for myopia

Background

With the difficulties in IOL power calculation and the potential side effects occurring postoperatively, multifocal IOL implantation after previous corneal refractive surgery are rarely reported especially for the trifocal IOL. Herein we report the clinical observation of trifocal IOL implantation in patients with previous myopia excimer laser correction. In this study, a multi-formula average method was performed for the IOLs power calculation to improve the accuracy. Visual and refractive outcomes were analyzed, and the subjective quality of patients’ life was evaluated by questionnaires survey.

Methods

This retrospective case series included patients with previous myopia excimer laser correction who underwent femtosecond laser assisted phacoemulsification and trifocal IOL (AT LISA tri 839 MP) implantation. Follow-up was done at 1-day, 1-month and 3-month to assess the visual outcomes. Outcome measures were uncorrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuity (UDVA, UIVA, UNVA), manifest refraction, defocus curve, and subjective quality of vision.

Results

Twenty-one Eyes from sixteen patients (14 eyes with previous laser in situ keratomileusis and 7 eyes with previous photorefractive keratectomy) were included. Mean postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) at 3-month was − 0.56 D ± 0.49 SD, wherein, 10 eyes (47.6%) were within ±0.50 D of the desired emmetropia and 19 eyes (90.5%) were within ±1.0 D. Mean monocular UDVA, UIVA and UNVA (logMAR) at last visit were 0.02 ± 0.07, 0.10 ± 0.10, and 0.15 ± 0.11 respectively. Three patients (19%) reported halos and glare in postoperative 3 months, two of them needed to use spectacles to improve the intermediate visual acuity. Fifteen patients (94%) reported a satisfaction score of ≥3.5 out of 4.0, without any difficulty in daily activity. Thirteen patients (81%) did not need spectacles at all distances, while the other 3 patients (19%) used spectacles for near-distance related visual activity. Mean composite score of the VF-14 questionnaire was 95.00 ± 7.29 out of 100.

Conclusions

Trifocal IOL implantation after myopia excimer laser correction could restore good distance, intermediate visual acuity and acceptable near visual acuity, and provide accurate refractive outcomes as well as high spectacles independence rate.

Multifocal intraocular lenses and retinal diseases

Purpose

Multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs) are often discouraged in patients with or at risk of retinal disorders (including diabetic retinopathy, age-related macular degeneration, and epiretinal membranes), as MIOLs are believed to reduce contrast sensitivity (CS). Concerns with MIOLs have also been raised in individuals with visual field defects, fixation instability or eccentric preferred retinal locations. The aim of this study is to review the influence of MIOL on quality of vision in patients with retinal diseases.

Methods

We reviewed the PubMed and Web of Science databases to identify relevant studies using the following keywords: multifocal intraocular lens, cataract surgery, cataract extraction, lens exchange, diabetic retinopathy, age-related macular degeneration, and contrast sensitivity.

Results

Studies evaluating CS in MIOLs present conflicting results: MIOLs either did not influence CS or resulted in worse performance under low-illuminance conditions and higher spatial frequencies when compared to monofocal IOLs. Nevertheless, MIOLs preserved CS levels within the age-matched normal range. Two studies reported that patients with concurrent retinal diseases receiving a MIOL, both unilaterally and bilaterally, reported a significant improvement in visual-related outcomes. Individuals with a monofocal IOL in one eye and a MIOL in the fellow eye reported greater subjective satisfaction with the MIOL.

Conclusion

We were unable to find evidence suggesting that patients with retinal diseases should be advised against MIOLs. Nevertheless, more research is needed to address the aforementioned concerns and to optimize the use of MIOLs in eyes with retinal disease.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00417-020-04603-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Functional magnetic resonance imaging to assess neuroadaptation to multifocal intraocular lenses

PURPOSE

To evaluate the use of functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to assess neuroadaptation to multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs).

SETTING

Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.

DESIGN

Prospective case study.

METHODS

Patients with bilateral diffractive IOL implantation after cataract surgery had functional MRI at postoperative intervals of 3 weeks and 6 months. A nonintervention control group was included as proof of concept. Functional stimuli consisted of sinusoidal gratings with threshold contrast and a light source to induce disability glare. Subjective quality of vision and reading performance were assessed and wavefront analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The study comprised 30 patients in the study group and 15 in the control group. Glare decreased the functional MRI signal measured for sinusoidal gratings initially (3 weeks) but not at 6 months (P = .04), which was confirmed by contrast detection under glare improvement (P = .002). Patients showed increased activity of cortical areas involved in visual attention, procedural learning, effortful cognitive control, and goal-oriented behavior in the early postoperative period, which normalized at 6 months. There were no differences in aberrations, Strehl ratio, or modulation transfer function despite significant decreases in questionnaire symptom scores and visual acuity and reading performance improvements. The control group remained unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

Neuroadaptation to multifocal IOLs took place initially through recruitment of visual attentional and procedural learning networks. Thereafter, a form of long-term adaptation/functional plasticity occurred, leading to brain activity regularization toward a non-effort pattern. These findings, which reinforce the crucial role of higher-level brain regions in the perceptual construction of vision, were consistent with functional and questionnaire outcomes and were unrelated to optical properties.

Nationwide Prospective Cohort Study on Cataract Surgery With Multifocal Intraocular Lens Implantation in Japan

PURPOSE

To conduct a nationwide prospective cohort study of multifocal intraocular lens (mfIOL) implantation to determine clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction and assess factors affecting patient satisfaction.

DESIGN

Prospective, multicenter cohort study.

METHODS

Setting: institutional; patient population: a total of 1051 consecutive patients (1631 eyes) who underwent cataract surgery with mfIOL implantation at 65 Japanese institutions from January 2017 to June 2018. The inclusion criteria were patient age of 20 years and older and cataract surgery with mfIOL implantation. The exclusion criteria were the absence of informed consent, completed postoperative questionnaires, and no record of the IOL models implanted.

OBSERVATION PROCEDURES

the uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuities (UDVAs and CDVAs) at 5 m; uncorrected VAs at 50, 40, and 30 cm; and questionnaires regarding subjective visual symptoms, spectacle independence, and surgical satisfaction were assessed 3 months postoperatively.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

odds ratios for the overall surgical satisfaction were computed for the preoperative/postoperative factors.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 1384 eyes of 871 patients. The UDVAs and CDVAs, respectively, improved significantly at 3 months postoperatively. The intermediate and near VAs varied with the IOL models; 68.4% of patients were almost or totally spectacle-independent; 3.9% of patients reported surgical dissatisfaction. In patients implanted bilaterally with the same mfIOLs, postoperative blurred vision and/or decreased contrast was the most important factor in the overall surgical satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

MfIOLs provided good visual outcomes and high satisfaction rates in this large patient cohort. The difference in the outcomes with the extended depth-of-focus IOLs did not differ significantly from the bifocal IOLs. The postoperative blurred vision is important to the overall surgical satisfaction.

Visual Outcomes, Visual Quality and Patient Satisfaction: Comparing a Blended Bifocal Approach to Bilateral Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens Implantation

Purpose

To compare visual outcomes, quality of vision and patient satisfaction between a blended apodized diffractive bifocal lens combination and bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus intraocular lens (IOL).

Patients and methods

Subjects implanted with either the blended bifocal (Blended) or bilateral extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL combinations were examined 3 to 24 months after second eye surgery. The primary outcome measure was the patient’s best distance-corrected near visual acuity (VA) at 40cm. The secondary outcome measures were scores on the Quality of Vision Survey, the Catquest-9SF and the Visual Functioning Questionnaires, uncorrected binocular intermediate and near VA at 4–6m, 60cm and 40cm, the manifest refraction and the best-corrected monocular and binocular distance VA.

Results

Twenty-five EDOF subjects and 23 blended subjects were analyzed. The uncorrected and best-distance corrected intermediate VA was statistically significantly better in the EDOF group (p < 0.05); no other significant differences were noted at distance or near. The EDOF group had significantly higher percentage of patients having no difficulty with hobbies and handicrafts (p < 0.05). Eighty-seven percent of the blended subjects and 79% of the EDOF subjects were “very” or “fairly” satisfied with their vision (p = 0.52). The frequency, severity and degree of bother from visual disturbances were comparable between the two groups; however, more subjects in the EDOF group reported severe disturbances (36% vs 4%).

Conclusion

Distance and near VA are similar with both IOL designs, but intermediate VA was better with the EDOF IOL resulting in lower difficulty with intermediate tasks such as hobbies and handicrafts. Despite the difference at intermediate VA, satisfaction was similar between the two groups and there were greater reports of severe visual disturbances in the EDOF group.

Retrospective analysis on the visual outcomes and photic phenomena following bilateral extended depth of focus intraocular lens implants

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate binocular visual outcomes and presence of photic phenomena in patients with bilateral extended depth of focus (EDF) intraocular lens (IOL) implants.

DESIGN

Retrospective consecutive case series.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients above the age of 18 years without prior ocular pathology or surgery with bilateral EDF IOL implants (ZXR00; Johnson & Johnson Vision) between January 2015 and December 2017 in Canadian ophthalmology centres.

METHODS

Patient charts were retrospectively evaluated for binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCDVA), binocular corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), binocular uncorrected near visual acuity (UCNVA), photic phenomena (glare, halos, or dysphotopsia), complications, or reoperations. Subgroup analysis investigated the effect of monovision on the above outcomes.

RESULTS

In total, 87 individuals with bilateral EDF IOL implants were included in the analysis. Median logMAR pre-operative CDVA was 0.18 (0.1-0.3). The median logMAR postoperative bilateral UCDVA was 0.14 (0.00-0.18), median CDVA was 0.00 (0.00-0.10), and median UCNVA was 0.10 (0.10-0.20). Overall, 16 (18.4%) cases self-reported the presence of photic phenomena, the most common of which were halos (13.8%). Subgroup analysis determined that there was no significant difference in visual outcomes or presence of photic phenomena when stratifying patients based on the degree of postoperative monovision (p = 0.31-0.57).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the Tecnis Symfony EDF IOL provided a reasonable range of binocular distance and near vision. Approximately 12.6% of patients self-reported any postoperative photic phenomena; however, all cases were subjectively considered mild and tolerable. Monovision had no effect on visual outcomes or the presence of photic phenomena.

AcrySof IQ PanOptix Intraocular Lens Versus Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens and Trifocal Intraocular Lens: A Clinical Overview

AcrySof IQ PanOptix Model TFNT00 (Alcon Laboratories, Fort Worth, TX) is a 1-piece aspheric hydrophobic presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL) launched in 2015. Unlike traditional trifocal IOLs that usually have an intermediate focal point of 80 cm, the PanOptix IOL is designed to have an intermediate focal point of 60 cm (arms-length), a more natural and comfortable working distance to perform functional tasks on computers, laptops, mobiles, among others. The non-apodized PanOptix IOL uses the ENhanced LIGHT ENergy (ENLIGHTEN; Alcon Laboratories, Fort Worth, TX) optical technology that provides high (88%) utilization of light energy, low dependence on pupil size in all lighting conditions, and a more comfortable near-to-intermediate range of vision than traditional trifocal IOLs. This review provides an overview of the clinical performance of the PanOptix IOL and discusses it in the context of other commercially available trifocal IOLs, FineVision Micro F (PhysIOL, Liege, Belgium), the AT LISA tri 839MP (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Jena, Germany) and the extended depth of focus IOL, TECNIS Symfony (Abbott Medical Optics, Santa Ana, CA). A literature search was performed in the PubMed database to identify studies that have assessed the visual and other clinical outcomes with the PanOptix IOL. In total, 12 studies were included in this review article. Overall, the clinical evidence suggests that in general good visual outcomes, along with a high degree of spectacle independence, are achieved in patients implanted with the PanOptix, FineVision, AT LISA and Symfony IOLs. However, every MIOL has its benefits and limitations, which along with patient's needs and clinical conditions are important factors to consider while selecting an IOL to achieve best possible post-operative outcomes.

Refractive surgery

Refractive surgery has evolved beyond laser refractive techniques over the past decade. Laser refractive surgery procedures (such as laser in-situ keratomileusis), surface ablation techniques (such as laser epithelial keratomileusis), and photorefractive keratectomy have now been established as fairly safe procedures that produce excellent visual outcomes for patients with low-to-moderate amounts of ametropia. Additionally, a broader selection of options are now available to treat a wider range of refractive errors. Small incision lenticule extraction uses a femtosecond laser to shape a refractive lenticule, which is removed through a small wound. The potential advantages of this procedure include greater tectonic strength and less dry eye. In the future, intracorneal implants could be used to treat hyperopia or presbyopia. Phakic intraocular implants and refractive lens exchange might be useful options in carefully selected patients for correcting high degrees of ametropia. Thus, physicians are now able to provide patients with the appropriate refractive corrective option based on the individual's risk-benefit profile.

Short-term outcomes of combined pars plana vitrectomy for epiretinal membrane and phacoemulsification surgery with multifocal intraocular lens implantation

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the functional and anatomical outcomes of combined phacovitrectomy with multifocal intraocular lens (mfIOL) implantation.

Methods

Retrospective, interventional, non-comparative case series of six eyes that received a combined phacoemulsification surgery with apodized, diffractive mfIOL implantation for cataract and pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with membrane peeling for epiretinal membrane (ERM). Outcome measures included distance and near visual acuities (DVA and NVA), central macular thickness (CMT), intraocular pressure (IOP), and disruption of external limiting membrane (ELM) or inner-segment outer-segment (IS/OS) junction.

Results

Mean logMAR glare DVA improved from 0.40 (Snellen 20/50) preoperatively to a mean uncorrected DVA of 0.038 (Snellen 20/22) (P=0.004) at 6 months after surgery. All eyes achieved NVA of J2 or better by 12 months postoperatively. Median CMT improved by 10 µm and mean IOP increased by 1 mmHg at 12 months postoperatively. Percentage of patients with ELM or IS/OS disruptions decreased from 66.7% to 33.3%. Two eyes demonstrated residual metamorphopsia on Amsler grid testing postoperatively. Postoperatively, four eyes required laser capsulotomy and one required LASEK for refractive correction.

Conclusion

Combined phacovitrectomy, membrane peeling, and mfIOL implantation improved VA in patients with idiopathic ERM. Multifocality was achieved, but final visual outcome was delayed due to posterior capsular opacification and macular healing.

Visual Performance after a Unilateral or Bilateral Implantation of Enlarged Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lens in Patients with Cataract: A Prospective Clinical Trial

Purpose

To investigate visual performances after a unilateral or bilateral implantation of enlarged depth-of-focus intraocular lens in patients with cataract.

Methods

In this prospective study, uneventful phacoemulsification and TECNIS® Symfony intraocular lens implantation were performed in 20 eyes of 17 patients. At postoperative 1, 4, and 12 weeks, the logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution visual acuity at far, intermediate, and near distances and the spherical equivalent in manifest refraction and automated refraction were measured. A questionnaire was used to investigate glare, spectacle dependency, and satisfaction at 12 weeks. The mean numerical error and mean absolute error were compared between intraocular lens formulas to assess the best-fit formula.

Results

The logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution visual acuity significantly improved to 0.02 at far, 0.02 at intermediate, and 0.27 at near distances at 12 weeks (p < 0.05). Spherical equivalent was −0.79 D on automated refraction and was significantly lower than −0.26 D measured on manifest refraction. Patients' satisfaction score was 9.06, 8.94, and 6.65 for far, intermediate, and near distances, respectively. Near glasses were required in 5 patients and 2 patients complained of photic phenomenon. Visual performances were not significantly different between bilateral and unilateral implanted patients. No patients reported bilateral imbalance due to unilateral surgery. The mean numerical error was closest to 0 D using the Barrett Universal II formula. The mean absolute error was not significantly different between these formulas.

Conclusion

Unilateral or bilateral implantation of the enlarged depth-of-focus intraocular lens seems to be equally effective in improving visual performances in patients with cataract.

Effect of Crystalline Lens Aberrations on Adaptive Optics Simulation of Intraocular Lenses

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of the lens aberrations on the adaptive optics visual simulation of pseudophakic intraocular lens (IOL) profiles.

METHODS

In 20 right phakic eyes, lens higher order aberrations (HOAs) were calculated as the whole eye minus the corneal aberrations. Visual simulation using low and high contrast corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) testing was carried out with the VAO instrument (Voptica, SL, Murcia, Spain), considering three optical conditions of the lens: removing HOA (no lens-HOA), removing spherical aberration (no lens-SA), and with lens HOA (natural condition). In addition, a through-focus visual simulation of a trifocal diffractive IOL profile with high contrast CDVA was also measured in two conditions: no lens-HOA and natural condition. Three different pupil sizes (3, 4.5, and 6 mm) were tested for all conditions.

RESULTS

There were no significant intersubject differences between the three optical conditions and in the IOL simulation for all pupil sizes (P > .05). For 4.5- and 6-mm pupils, mean VA values of the no-lens SA and no lens-HOA conditions were similar and slightly worse than those of the natural condition. Individual differences between the no lens-HOA condition and the other two optical conditions, estimated as 95% limits of agreement, were acceptable for 3-mm pupil but worse as pupil diameter increased.

CONCLUSIONS

The effect of lens aberrations on visual simulation is imperceptible for a small pupil diameter of 3 mm. Although the increment of pupil size increases the probability of patients with significant visual impact of lens HOAs, the mean intersubject VA differences are negligible. [J Refract Surg. 2019;35(2):126-131.].

Near Vision Improvement with the Use of a New Topical Compound for Presbyopia Correction: A Prospective, Consecutive Interventional Non-Comparative Clinical Study

Introduction

To report the outcomes in near vision, optical quality and pupil diameter of a new pharmacological therapy (FOV tears) for presbyopia.

Methods

This was a prospective, consecutive, interventional, non-comparative clinical study in which 117 presbyopic patients were given one drop of the novel therapy (FOV tears) in each eye, followed 2 h after the instillation of the eye drop by an evaluation of the binocular uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) and uncorrected distance visual acuity. The objective scatter index and pupil diameter under photopic and scotopic conditions before and after instillation were also assessed. The patients were divided into two groups according to their age, with group 1 patients being 41 and 50 years old and group 2 patients, between 51 and 65 years old.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 50.2 years. The mean UNVA before the use of the eye drop was 0.35 LogMAR, which improved to 0.16 LogMAR at 2 h after the use of the eye drop (p = 0.000). Nine patients did not show an improvement in UNVA, but no patient showed a loss of lines. Fourteen patients (11.9%) reported headaches as a side effect of the therapy.

Conclusion

This pharmacological therapy improved near vision by one or more lines (mean improvement 0.18 lines) in 92.3% of the patients at 2 h following the instillation of the eye drops. The group with the youngest patients gained more lines than the group with the oldest patients.

Comparison of the Clinical Performance of Refractive Rotationally Asymmetric Multifocal IOLs with Other Types of IOLs: A Meta-Analysis

Objective

To compare the clinical performance of refractive rotationally asymmetric multifocal intraocular lens (IOLs) with spherical monofocal, accommodating, and bifocal IOLs.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and Web of Science up to February 2017 was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) and comparative cohort studies. Main outcomes were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), higher-order aberrations (HOAs), MTF, Strehl ratio, and residual sphere and cylinder.

Results

Mplus provided significantly worse UDVA than spherical monofocal IOLs (WMD: 0.13, P=0.008), but significantly better UIVA than high-add bifocal IOLs (WMD: −0.19, P < 0.00001), spherical monofocal IOLs (WMD: −0.12, P < 0.0001), and accommodating IOLs (WMD: −0.21, P < 0.00001). Mplus provided significantly worse UNVA than high-add bifocal IOLs (WMD: 0.07, P < 0.00001), but significantly better UNVA than spherical monofocal IOLs (WMD: −0.19, P < 0.00001). Mplus resulted in significantly higher HOAs than high-add bifocal IOLs (WMD: 0.38, P < 0.00001) and spherical monofocal IOLs (WMD: 0.51, P=0.0004). Mplus provided a significantly lower MTF cut-off and Strehl ratio than other type of IOLs.

Conclusion

The Mplus IOLs perform best regarding intermediate visual acuity whereas they lack in distance visual acuity compared to monofocal IOLs and near visual acuity compared to bifocal IOLs. These results may be due to structure of Mplus IOLs resulting in higher-order aberrations.

Visual outcomes, spectacle independence and satisfaction after diffractive trifocal intraocular lens implantation

PURPOSE

To investigate visual outcomes, spectacle independence, and patient satisfaction after trifocal intraocular lens implantation.

METHODS

A retrospective study conducted on 5,186 patients who underwent phacoemulsification and were implanted with a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens (FineVision Micro F, PhysIOL SA, Liège, Belgium).

RESULTS

The mean pre-operative keratometry was 43.61±1.55 D, and mean keratometric cylinder was -0.86±0.66 D. At 3 months post-operatively, values changed to 43.59±1.56 and -0.71±0.46 D, respectively. Mean sphere varied from 2.04±2.60 to 0.14±0.38 D, and mean spherical equivalent from 1.64±2.61 to -0.05±0.36 D. More than 60% of the patients achieved better corrected distance visual acuity. The majority had a final residual refractive error (predictability) lower than 1 D (99.1%), with 14.3% needing optical adjustment (bioptics). Posterior capsulotomy was performed in 2.2%, and the lens was replaced in 5 patients. A high percentage of patients were satisfied in terms of vision and spectacle independence at all distances. Although 2% referred to worsening of night vision quality, only 2% were not very satisfied and 20 patients were dissatisfied. The causes were: blurred vision (7 cases), spectacle dependence (10), dysphotopsia (7), and dry eye (4).

CONCLUSIONS

The implantation of this model provided good visual performance in all distances, as well as high levels of spectacle independence and satisfaction.

Small-aperture intraocular lens tolerance to induced astigmatism

Purpose

This prospective, single-site study aimed to assess the corresponding change in monocular visual acuity with induced astigmatic defocus in subjects implanted with a small-aperture intraocular lens (IOL).

Patients and methods

Ten subjects with a mean age of 65.1 years were recruited. Eleven eyes of these 10 subjects were implanted (9 unilaterally, 1 bilaterally) with an IC-8 small-aperture IOL. Baseline manifest refraction and best-corrected distance visual acuity were measured with a Snellen chart (Tumbling E chart). Astigmatic defocus was induced in the same axis as the manifest sphere-cylinder refraction or at 180° for a spherical refraction. Cylinder defocus was reduced in 0.50 D steps from −2.50 D, and distance visual acuity was measured at each level of defocus.

Results

Mean distance visual acuity was 0.08 logarithm of minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) ±0.08 (20/24) at 1.50 D of defocus, 0.18 logMAR ±0.08 (20/30) at 2.00 D of defocus, and 0.24 logMAR ±0.07 (20/35) at 2.50 D of defocus. Eight out of 10 subjects achieved 20/25 or better vision with 1.50 D of cylinder defocus, and all subjects were 20/30 or better. Ten out of 11 subjects were 20/40 or better with 2.50 D of defocus.

Conclusion

The IC-8 IOL shows good tolerance to astigmatic defocus with minimal effect on visual acuity. Overall, 20/25 or better distance acuity was maintained through 1.50 D cylinder defocus.

Rotational stability and visual performance 3 months after bilateral implantation of a new toric extended range of vision intraocular lens

Purpose

To evaluate the clinical outcomes after implantation of Symfony^® toric extended range of vision (ERV) intraocular lenses (IOLs) in subjects with preoperative corneal astigmatism.

Setting

Ifocus Øyeklinikk, Haugesund, Norway.

Design

Prospective non-comparative study.

Patients and methods

The study population consisted of 30 patients, with preoperative corneal astigmatism between 0.88 and 3.29 D, undergoing bilateral cataract removal or refractive lens exchange with implantation of Tecnis Symfony toric ERV IOLs. Main outcome measures were visual acuity, refraction, IOL axis rotational stability, patient and surgeon satisfaction, photic phenomena, and quality of life at 3 months.

Results

Postoperatively, mean binocular uncorrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuities (logMAR) were −0.05±0.11, −0.03±0.08, and 0.09±0.10, respectively. A significant reduction in manifest cylinder (P<0.001) and spherical equivalent (P=0.001) was found after 3 months. Monocular and binocular corrected distance visual acuity also improved significantly with surgery (P<0.001). In terms of binocular uncorrected intermediate and near visual acuity, a total of 96% and 82% of patients achieved 0.1 logMAR (Snellen: 20/25) or better, respectively. Toric IOL axis showed a median rotation of 2.0 degrees (range 0.0–16.0 degrees) from the end of surgery to 3 months. The median patient satisfaction scores for distance, intermediate, and near vision were 9.0, 9.0, and 8.0, respectively. Fifty percent of patients reported complete spectacle independence and most patients (89%) were not bothered by any photic phenomena.

Conclusion

Bilateral implantation of the Symfony toric ERV IOL appeared to be safe and achieved good visual performance and high satisfaction.

Premium intraocular lenses: The past, present and future

Purpose

To present potential benefits as well as limitations of premium intraocular lens (IOL) use, and provide insight in future of premium cataract surgery.

Methods

Bibliographic research was performed in PubMed/Medline database, and the most recently updated papers were evaluated. Keywords used were: premium intraocular lens, multifocal intraocular lens, toric intraocular lens, toric multifocal intraocular lens, accommodative intraocular lens, and the respective brand names.

Results

Multifocal IOLs provide uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 0.03 logMAR in 82.3%–95.7% of patients and overall spectacle independence in 81%–85% of patients. Toric IOLs provide UDVA of 0.3 logMAR in 70%–95% of patients, residual astigmatism of 1 D or less is noted in 67%–88% of patients, and spectacle independence is reported in 60%–85% of patients. Toric multifocal IOLs provide UDVA of 0.3 logMAR in 92%–97% of patients, and spectacle independence is reported in 79%–90% of patients. Accommodative IOLs represent intensively developing field in ophthalmology, and the results are still variable depending on the IOL model.

Conclusions

Premium IOL technology and advanced surgical techniques have significantly improved postoperative visual outcomes. Future developments will potentiate development of new premium IOL designs that will provide spectacle independence and excellent visual outcomes after cataract surgery.

Monovision LASIK Versus Presbyopia-Correcting IOLs: Comparison of Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes

PURPOSE

To compare clinical and quality of life outcomes between patients who underwent monovision LASIK and refractive lens exchange.

METHODS

The study comprised 590 patients with refractive lens exchange and 608 patients with monovision LASIK available for 3-month postoperative clinical visits. All patients with refractive lens exchange had a Tecnis Symfony lens (Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc., Santa Ana, CA) in at least one eye. Patients were divided into four refractive categories: moderate to high myopia, low myopia, plano presbyopia, and hyperopia. Three-month postoperative data were compared between monovision LASIK and refractive lens exchange for each group.

RESULTS

Postoperatively, the percentage of patients with binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity of 20/20 or better, for monovision LASIK and refractive lens exchange, respectively, was as follows: moderate to high myopia: 84.7% vs 90.7% (P = .31), low myopia: 89.4% vs 85.2% (P = .45), plano presbyopia: 90.5% vs 89.9% (P = .90), and hyperopia: 77.5% vs 84.2% (P = .03). For near vision, the percentage with binocular near visual acuity of 20/40 or better (J5) at 40 cm was as follows: moderate to high myopia: 98.9% vs 90.7% (P < .01), low myopia: 100% vs 98.1% (P = .17), plano presbyopia: 96.8% vs 95.8% (P = .34), and hyperopia: 95.6% vs 95.7% (P = .96). There was a statistically significant difference in patient satisfaction in favor of monovision LASIK for moderate to high myopia (94.3% for monovision LASIK vs 79.1% for refractive lens exchange, P <.01). For all other refractive categories, there was no significant difference in patient satisfaction. All myopic patients with refractive lens exchange experienced more postoperative visual phenomena than patients with monovision LASIK. The plano presbyopia group had comparable visual phenomena between the two procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Monovision LASIK and refractive lens exchange are both reasonable options for presbyopic patients. [J Refract Surg. 2017;33(11):749-758.].

Correction of presbyopia: An integrated update for the practical surgeon

Presbyopia results from loss or insufficiency of the eye's accommodative ability, and clinically manifests as the inability to focus near objects on the retina. It is one of the most common causes of visual impairment worldwide especially in adults of productive or working age. Various means of compensating for the loss of accommodative ability have been devised from optical tools such as spectacles and contact lenses, to topical medications and to surgical procedures. A comprehensive search on journal articles about topical and surgical correction of presbyopia was undertaken. The various techniques for presbyopia correction, as enumerated in these articles, are discussed in this paper with the addition of our personal experience and perspective on the future of these techniques.

Clinical outcomes of a new diffractive multifocal intraocular lens

AIM

To evaluate clinical outcomes after implantation of a new diffractive aspheric multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) with +3.00 addition power.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, consecutive case series of cataract patients who underwent bilateral implantation of the Optiflex MO/HF D012 (Moss Vision Inc. Ltd, London, UK) multifocal IOL. Patients followed for 6mo were included in the study. Data on distance, intermediate and near visual acuity, refractive error [manifest spherical equivalent (MSE)], contrast sensitivity, adverse events, subjective symptoms, spectacle independence and patient satisfaction [visual function questionnaire (VFQ)-25 questionnaire] were retrieved from electronic medical records and analyzed.

RESULTS

Forty eyes of 20 patients with a mean age of 66.7±8.5y (range: 53-82) were included in the study. Mean uncorrected distance, near and intermediate visual acuity remained stable through postoperative visits and was 0.19±0.19 logMAR, Jaeger 4 and Jaeger 3 respectively at the 6mo visit. At the end of postoperative 6mo, MSE was -0.14±0.42 diopters (D) and 98% of the eyes were within 1.00 D of target refraction. Postoperative low contrast (10%) visual acuity remained stable (P=0.54) through follow up visits with a mean of 0.35±0.17 logMAR at the 6mo visit. There were no reported adverse events. None of the patients reported subjective symptoms of halo or glare. Spectacle independence rate was 90%. Mean VFQ-25 questionnaire score was 93.5±6.12.

CONCLUSION

The Optiflex MO/HF-DO12 IOL was safely implanted and successfully restored distance, intermediate and near visual acuity without impairing contrast sensitivity. High levels of spectacle independence were achieved at all distances including intermediate distance.

Comparison of clinical performance between trifocal and bifocal intraocular lenses: A meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical performance between trifocal and bifocal intraocular lenses in bilateral cataract and/or refractive lens exchange (RLE) surgery.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and Web of Science was performed through October 2016 to identify randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative cohort studies. The primary outcomes were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), defocus curve, spectacle independence, patient satisfaction and contrast sensitivity. The secondary outcomes were residual sphere, spherical equivalent (SE), cylinder and complications.

RESULTS

Six RCTs and 2 cohort studies including 568 eyes (278 in the trifocal group and 290 in the bifocal group) were identified. There was a statically significant difference between the two groups in UDVA (WMD: -0.03, 95% CI: -0.05 to -0.01, P = 0.005), but the difference (0.03 log MAR) is not clinically significant. Intermediate visual acuity was better in the trifocal IOL group judging from UIVA and defocus curves. There was a statically significant difference between the two groups in residual cylinder (WMD: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.20, P = 0.02), and subgroup AT Lisa tri 839MP trifocal also showed significant better UNVA than bifocal IOLs (WMD: -0.13, 95% CI: -0.17 to -0.08, P<0.00001). However, no significant differences were observed in UNVA (WMD: -0.04, 95% CI: -0.11 to 0.02, P = 0.19), spectacle independence (WMD: 1.27, 95% CI: 0.89 to 18.15, P = 0.07), patient satisfaction (WMD: 4.01, 95% CI: 0.07 to 22.72, P = 0.87), residual sphere (WMD: -0.03, 95% CI: -0.18 to 0.13, P = 0.74), SE (WMD: 0.04, 95% CI: -0.09 to 0.16, P = 0.55) or complications (WMD: 2.08, 95% CI: 0.35 to 12.43, P = 0.42).

CONCLUSIONS

Trifocal IOL technology (especially AT Lisa trifocal 839M trifocal) had a clear advantage over bifocal IOLs in intermediate visual acuity, while both trifocal IOLs and bifocal IOLs showed excellent performance in distance visual acuity. AT Lisa trifocal 839M trifocal could provide better uncorrected near visual acuity than bifocal IOLs. However, more evidence is needed to compare their spectacle independence, higher satisfaction rate, and photic phenomena.