Comparison of visual and refractive outcomes after bilateral implantation of toric intraocular lenses with or without a multifocal component

Epidemiology and Burden of Astigmatism: A Systematic Literature Review

SIGNIFICANCE

This is the first literature review to report the epidemiology, patient burden, and economic burden of astigmatism in the general adult population. The unmet needs of astigmatism patients with coexisting ocular conditions (cataract, glaucoma, dry eye, presbyopia, or macular degeneration) and risks associated with untreated astigmatism are also reviewed and reported.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to identify, report, and summarize the published literature on epidemiology, patient burden, and economic burden of astigmatism using a systematic literature review.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched (January 1996 to May 2021). Search results were limited to the English language. Proceedings (2018 to 2021) from ophthalmology congresses were searched along with gray literature using the Google Scholar platform.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 6804 citations, of which 125 met the inclusion criteria (epidemiology, 68; patient burden, 60; economic burden, 6). Astigmatism prevalence in the general population varied from 8 to 62%, with higher rates in individuals 70 years or older. The prevalence of with-the-rule astigmatism was higher in individuals 40 years or younger, whereas rates of against-the-rule and oblique astigmatism increased with age. Astigmatic patients experienced decreased vision quality, increased glare (53 to 77%), haloes (28 to 80%), night-time driving difficulties (66%), falls, and spectacle dependence (45 to 85%). Astigmatic patients performed vision-related tasks slower (1 D, 9% slower; 2 D, 29% slower) and made more errors (1 D, 38% more errors; 2 D, 370% more errors) compared with fully corrected individuals. In cataract patients with astigmatism, the annual mean per-patient productivity loss costs ranged from €55 ($71) to €84 ($108), and mean informal care costs ranged from €30 ($39) to €55 ($71) with a mean of 2.3 to 4.1 hours spent on informal care.

CONCLUSIONS

Uncorrected astigmatism decreases patients' vision-related quality of life, decreases productivity among working-age adults, and poses an economic burden on patients and their families.

Long-term changes in the refractive effect of a toric intraocular lens on astigmatism correction

Purpose

To examine the long-term changes in the astigmatism-correcting effect of a toric intraocular lens (IOL) after stabilization of surgically induced astigmatic changes due to cataract surgery.

Methods

Unilateral eyes of 120 patients that received a toric IOL for against-the-rule (ATR) or with-the-rule (WTR) astigmatism were enrolled. Manifest refractive and anterior corneal astigmatism, and ocular residual astigmatism which is mainly derived from internal optics were examined preoperatively, at approximately 2 months postoperatively (baseline) and at 5 ~ 10 years postbaseline. The astigmatism was decomposed to vertical/horizontal (Rx) and oblique components (Ry), which was compared between baseline and 5 ~ 10 years postbaseline.

Results

In the eyes having ATR astigmatism, the mean Rx and Ry of the manifest refractive and corneal astigmatism significantly changed toward ATR astigmatism between the baseline and 5 ~ 10 years postbaseline (p ≤ 0.0304), but those of ocular residual astigmatism did not change significantly between the 2 time points. In the eyes having WTR astigmatism, the Rx and Ry of refractive, corneal, and ocular residual astigmatism did not change significantly between the 2 time points. Double-angle plots revealed an ATR shift in refractive and corneal astigmatism and no marked change in the ocular residual astigmatism in the eyes with ATR astigmatism, and there is no change in this astigmatism in the eyes with WTR astigmatism.

Conclusion

The long-term changes with age in the effect of a toric IOL significantly deteriorated due to an ATR shift of corneal astigmatism in the eyes having ATR astigmatism, while it was maintained in eyes having WTR astigmatism, suggesting that ATR astigmatism should be overcorrected.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00417-021-05406-7.

Long-Term Changes in Manifest Refraction Subsequent to Cataract Surgery

PURPOSE

To examine the long-term refractive changes after stabilization of surgically induced changes (SICs) subsequent to cataract surgery.

SETTING

Private hospital.

DESIGN

Case-control study.

METHODS

Manifest refraction of 300 eyes of 300 patients that underwent phacoemulsification and 300 eyes of 300 age- and sex-matched patients without surgery was examined the day on which SICs stabilized (baseline) and ≥7 years postbaseline using an autorefractometer. Refraction was divided into 3 components: spherical power (M), vertical/horizontal astigmatism (J0), and oblique astigmatism (J45) using power vector analysis, and the components were compared between the 2 time-points and between groups.

RESULTS

In the surgery group, the mean M and J45 did not change significantly between baseline and ≥7 years postbaseline, but the J0 significantly decreased between the 2 time-points (P < .001), indicating an against-the-rule (ATR) shift. In the non-surgery group, the mean M significantly increased and J0 significantly decreased between the time-points (P < .001), whereas J45 did not change significantly. The mean change in M between the 2 time-points was significantly smaller in the surgery group (P < .001), whereas the changes in J0 and J45 did not differ significantly between the time-points.

CONCLUSION

Spherical power did not change and refractive astigmatism significantly changed toward ATR astigmatism during the more than 7-year follow-up after stabilization of SICs in pseudophakic eyes, while hyperopic and ATR shifts occurred in phakic eyes, and the astigmatic changes were comparable between pseudophakic and phakic eyes.

Evaluating Refractive and Visual Outcomes After Bilateral Implantation of an Apodized Diffractive Multifocal Toric Intraocular Lens with a Moderate Add in the Dominant Eye and a Higher Add in the Fellow Eye

Purpose

To review refractive, visual acuity, defocus curve and subjective visual quality results after bilateral implantation of an apodized diffractive toric intraocular lens (IOL) with a moderate add in the dominant eye and a higher add in the non-dominant eye.

Setting

One site in Gainesville, GA, USA.

Design

Single arm, non-randomized prospective study.

Methods

This was a single-arm prospective study of visual acuity and subjective visual quality after implantation of a toric low-add apodized diffractive multifocal IOL in the dominant eye and a higher add IOL of the same type in the non-dominant eye three months after surgery. Binocular visual acuity at 4 m, 60 cm and 40 cm was tested. Other tests included refraction, defocus curve measurement and evaluation of the quality of vision. Toric IOL orientation was also measured.

Results

A total of 29 subjects were enrolled. There were no statistically significant differences in the mean keratometry, corneal astigmatism or IOL sphere power implanted in the dominant and non-dominant eyes. Vision was preferred without any correction in more than half of the eyes tested (32/58, 55%). The residual refractive astigmatism was ≤ 0.50 D in 100% of eyes. Seventy-five percent of subjects (22/29) had 0.10 logMAR (20/25 Snellen) binocular uncorrected visual acuity at all tested distances. Glare and haloes were the most common visual disturbances, but most subjects (22/29, 76%) reported that they were not bothered by any visual disturbances. In 97% of eyes (56/58), the measured difference in orientation between 1 month and 3 months was less than 5 degrees, with no change more than 14 degrees.

Conclusion

This blended bifocal IOL modality appears to be well-tolerated by subjects with a good range of vision and minimal bother from visual disturbances.

Patient outcomes following implantation with a trifocal toric IOL: twelve-month prospective multicentre study

PURPOSE

To evaluate clinical outcomes with a premium diffractive-refractive trifocal toric intraocular lens (IOL) over a 12-month period.

METHODS

Multicentre prospective clinical trial including 227 eyes of 114 patients undergoing cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of the AT LISA tri toric 939MP IOL (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). One patient was implanted unilaterally. Outcome measures were: visual acuity, manifest refraction, reading performance, contrast sensitivity, defocus curve, patient satisfaction and subjective quality of vision. Alpins vector analysis was used to evaluate astigmatic changes.

RESULTS

12-month follow up results of binocular uncorrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuity were ≤0.3 logMAR in 99.0%, 98.10% and 91.40% of eyes, respectively. 79.7% of eyes had a cylinder value of ±0.50 D at 12 months post-surgery. Contrast sensitivity was in the normal range at 6 months post-surgery. The defocus curve exhibited a smooth transition between far and near foci. Vector analysis showed a mean magnitude of error of -0.16 ± 0.48 D. Mean binocular distance-corrected reading visual acuity was 0.15 ± 0.13 logRAD at 6 months postoperatively. 93.3%, 89.4% and 84.6% of patients expressed satisfaction (good or very good) with distance, intermediate and near vision, respectively, 12 months after surgery. Most (≥95%) patients felt that visual disturbances, including halos, glare, focusing difficulties and depth perception, caused little or no disturbance.

CONCLUSIONS

The diffractive-refractive trifocal toric IOL, AT LISA tri toric 939MP, provides effective distance, intermediate and near visual acuity in eyes with corneal astigmatism. Patient satisfaction was high and 98.1% of patients expressed satisfaction with the IOL implanted.

Comparison of the Visual Performance After Implantation of Bifocal and Trifocal Intraocular Lenses Having an Identical Platform

PURPOSE

To compare the visual performance after bilateral implantation of a diffractive bifocal or trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) from the same manufacturer using the same IOL platform.

METHODS

This prospective, non-randomized, controlled study involved patients who had cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of bifocal or trifocal IOLs. The near, intermediate, and distance visual acuities, defocus curve, optical quality including modulation transfer functions and higher-order aberrations, National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-14, patient satisfaction, spectacle independence, and perception of visual disturbances were assessed in all patients.

RESULTS

Fifty eyes (25 patients) were implanted with a diffractive trifocal IOL (AT LISA tri 839MP; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany) and 60 eyes (30 patients) with a diffractive bifocal IOL (AT LISA 809M; Carl Zeiss Meditec). The follow-up was 3 months. No statistically significant difference was found in distance or near visual acuity between the two groups (P ≥ .05). Uncorrected, corrected, and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuities were significantly better in the trifocal IOL group (P < .01). In the binocular defocus curve, the visual acuity was also significantly better for defocus of -1.00 to -2.00 diopters in eyes with trifocal IOL implantation (P < .01). Similar halos and glare were present in the two groups. The levels of overall satisfaction were similarly high between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Diffractive trifocal IOLs can provide significantly better intermediate vision and equivalent distance and near visual performance compared to bifocal IOLs and do not induce extra qualitative vision disturbances. [J Refract Surg. 2018;34(4):273-280.].

Patient-Centered and Visual Quality Outcomes of Premium Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review

Purpose

Over 8 million cataract surgeries are performed in the United States and the European Union annually, with many patients choosing to pay out of pocket for premium options including premium intraocular lens implants (IOLs) or laser-assisted cataract surgery (LACS). This report provides a systematic review evaluating patient-centered and visual quality outcomes comparing standard monofocal IOLs to premium cataract surgery options.

Methods

PubMed and EMBASE were searched for publications published between January 1, 1980, and September 18, 2016, on multifocal, accommodative, and toric IOLs, monovision, and LACS, which reported on 1) dysphotopsias, 2) contrast sensitivity, 3) spectacle independence, 4) vision-related quality of life or patient satisfaction, and 5) IOL exchange.

Results

Multifocal lenses achieved higher rates of spectacle independence compared to monofocal lenses but also had higher reported frequency of dysphotopsia and worse contrast sensitivity, especially with low light or glare. Accommodative lenses were not associated with reduced contrast sensitivity or more dysphotopsia but had only modest improvements in spectacle independence compared to monofocal lenses. Studies of monovision did not target a sufficiently myopic outcome in the near-vision eye to achieve the full potential for spectacle independence. Patients reported high levels of overall satisfaction regardless of implanted IOL. No studies correlated patient-reported outcomes with patient expectations.

Conclusions

Studies are needed to thoroughly compare patient-reported outcomes with concomitant patient expectations. In light of the substantial patient costs for premium options, patients and their surgeons will benefit from a better understanding of which surgical options best meet patients’ expectations and how those expectations can be impacted by premium versus monofocal—including monovision—options.

Clinical comparison of patient outcomes following implantation of trifocal or bifocal intraocular lenses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To assess the visual effects of trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) compared to bifocal IOLs in cataract surgery, a meta-analysis of prospective comparative clinical trials (including 4 randomized controlled trials and 4 cohorts) was conducted. The defocus curves showed a better distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (VA) for the trifocal group (MD −0.07; 95% CI, −0.10 to −0.05; p < 0.00001), while the VA outcomes showed no significant difference in distance VA (MD −0.03; 95% CI, −0.06 to 0.01; p = 0.13 for uncorrected distance VA and MD −0.00; 95% CI, −0.01 to 0.01; p = 0.78 for distance-corrected distance VA), near VA (MD −0.01; 95% CI, −0.07 to 0.04; p = 0.68 for uncorrected near VA and MD −0.01; 95% CI, −0.06 to 0.04; p = 0.66 for distance-corrected near VA) or refraction between the two groups. Contrast sensitivity and subjective visual quality yielded less conclusive results. Overall, a patient may achieve better intermediate VA with a trifocal IOL than with a bifocal IOL without any adverse effect on distance or near VA. The findings on contrast sensitivity and subjective visual quality were heterogeneous, with no clear results favoring either option.

Combination of Toric and multifocal intraocular lens implantation in bilateral cataract patients with unilateral astigmatism

AIM

To assess the binocular visual function in bilateral cataract patients with unilateral astigmatism after combined implantations of Toric with multifocal intraocular lens (IOL), and to compare with that of Toric and monofocal IOL implantation.

METHODS

All the 30 patients with unilateral astigmatism suffered bilateral cataract were randomly divided into two groups: Toric plus multifocal IOL group and Toric plus monofocal IOL group. Uncorrected and corrected visual acuity at distance (5.0 m), intermediate distance (0.6 m), and near (0.33 m), contrast sensitivity, and stereopsis were assessed 6mo after surgery. Patients were also surveyed for visual disturbances and spectacle dependence.

RESULTS

Binocular uncorrected visual acuity (LogMAR) of Toric/multifocal IOL eyes at distance, intermediate, near were 0.05±0.05, 0.24±0.10, and 0.14±0.06 respectively. The values of Toric plus monofocal IOL eyes were 0.06±0.07, 0.26±0.08, and 0.37±0.10 respectively. These values did not indicate significant differences between two groups with exception of near visual acuity. In the photopic condition (with or without glare), the contrast sensitivity of multifocal IOL eyes was significant lower than the monofocal IOL eyes in 18 cpd. In the mesopic condition, the contrast sensitivity of multifocal group was significant lower than monofocal group in 12 cpd, and in mesopic glare condition, this significant difference was found both in 6 cpd and 12 cpd. The stereopsis of Toric/multifocal IOL eyes decreased slightly (100±80 seconds of arc, t=2.222, P=0.136). Mean near vision for patient satisfaction was statistically significantly higher in Toric/multifocal IOL group patients versus than that in Toric/monofocal IOL group (80% vs 25.5%, P=0.000). Visual disturbance was not noticed in either group.

CONCLUSION

Although the combination of Toric and multifocal IOL implantation results in compromising stereoacuity, it can still provide patients with high levels of spectacle freedom and good overall binocular visual acuity.

Multifocal Toric Intraocular Lens for Traumatic Cataract in a Child

A child suffering from traumatic cataract and corneal astigmatism of 2.14 D had a phacoemulsification operation and implantation of a ReSTOR Toric intraocular lens (IOL) to correct the astigmatism. The primary outcome measurements were the uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected near vision at 40 cm, intraocular pressure, spherical equivalent refraction, residual astigmatism, corneal astigmatism, presence of unusual optical phenomena, and use of spectacles. At 7 months postoperatively, UDVA was maintained between 16/20 and 24/20, near vision was between J1 and J3, residual spherical refraction was 0-0.37 D, and residual refractive cylinder was between 0 and 0.67 D. A multifocal toric IOL can provide the possibility of satisfactory vision for both distant and near conditions without the use of spectacles to meet children's needs when studying and doing sports. Additionally, binocular vision can be reconstructed. This intervention, therefore, seems to be a satisfactory alternative.

Intraocular lens alignment methods

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews current concepts in intraocular lens alignment strategies to maximize intraocular lens (IOL) positioning.

RECENT FINDINGS

A variety of strategies has been developed to maximize toric IOL position, including preoperative calculators to determine the appropriate IOL power and orientation, intraoperative alignment devices, and postoperative software to determine if IOL rotation would be beneficial for refractive outcomes.

SUMMARY

The combination of using multiple toric IOL calculators and intraoperative alignment devices has improved toric IOL outcomes. The relationship of the posterior corneal power and its effect on outcomes remains to be fully elucidated. Postoperative IOL rotation may be necessary even when the IOL is aligned as planned because of surgically induced astigmatism.

The location of incision in cataract surgery and its impact on induced astigmatism

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of the present study is a systematic review of previous studies on choosing the best incision site for the correction of astigmatism in cataract surgery and assessing the amount of surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) with each approach.

RECENT FINDINGS

Regardless of astigmatism axis, studies show that using an on-axis incision is associated with favorable results for 0.5-1.0 diopter (D) of astigmatism. In cases with more than 1.0 D astigmatism, paired on-axis incisions can be appreciably efficient in astigmatism correction and cause at least 1.5 D SIA. Considering the amount of SIA, a temporal incision is the best approach when the patient has minimal amounts of corneal astigmatism preoperatively. At higher levels of astigmatism, if no other astigmatism correction method is used simultaneously, the temporal incision is used less frequently; however, since it is associated with the least SIA, it is still the choice site when another correction method is used.

SUMMARY

The temporal incisions in cataract surgery are associated with little SIA and are appropriate choices for mild preoperative astigmatism. At higher levels of preoperative astigmatism, superior incisions are associated with better results when combined methods are not applied.

Comparison of visual outcomes after implantation of diffractive trifocal toric intraocular lens and a diffractive apodized bifocal toric intraocular lens

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare a new diffractive trifocal toric lens with an apodized diffractive bifocal toric lens in terms of refractive and visual acuity (VA) outcomes, including low-contrast VA (LCVA), as well as the patient’s visual function 3 months after implantation.

Patients and methods

This is a randomized prospective study involving bilateral implantation of a trifocal toric or a bifocal toric lens. At 3 months postoperatively, the subject’s vision was tested both uncorrected and with his/her best distance correction at: distance (4 m), intermediate (63 cm), and near (40 cm). Binocular defocus curves were measured with no correction and with the subject’s best distance correction in place. Quality of vision was measured using the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire.

Results

A total of 22 patients were enrolled (eleven in each group). There was no statistically significant difference in the absolute change in measured rotation between 1 month and 3 months postoperatively between the two intraocular lens (IOL) groups (P=0.98). At 3 months, the postoperative refraction and distance VA by eye were similar between groups. There was no statistically significant difference in the measured LCVA between groups (P=0.39). The defocus curve showed that at 67 cm, the trifocal toric lens had statistically significantly better VA when compared to the bifocal toric lens. There were no statistically significant differences by group for any of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire scores (P>0.26 in all cases).

Conclusion

The trifocal toric IOL improved the intermediate vision without negatively impacting visual function and distance, near, or low-contrast VA when compared to a bifocal toric IOL. The toric component of the trifocal lens effectively reduced astigmatism and provided good rotational stability.

Astigmatism management in cataract surgery with Precizon(®) toric intraocular lens: a prospective study

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the visual and refractive outcomes and rotational stability of the new aspheric Precizon^® toric intraocular lens (IOL) for the correction of corneal astigmatism in cataract surgery.

Setting

Department of Ophthalmology, Hospital Geral de Santo António – Centro Hospitalar do Porto, EPE and Hospital de Pedro Hispano, Matosinhos, Portugal.

Design

This was a prospective clinical study.

Patients and methods

A total of 40 eyes of 27 patients with corneal astigmatism greater than 1.0 diopter (D) underwent cataract surgery with implantation of Precizon^® toric IOL. IOL power calculation was performed using optical coherence biometry (IOLMaster^®). Outcomes of uncorrected (UDVA) and best-spectacle corrected distance visual acuities (BCDVA), refraction, and IOL rotation were analyzed at the 1st week, 1st, 3rd, and 6th month’s evaluations.

Results

The median postoperative UDVA was better than preoperative best-spectacle corrected distance visual acuity (0.02 [0.06] logMAR vs 0.19 [0.20] logMAR, P<0.001). At 6 months, postoperative UDVA was 0.1 logMAR or better in 95% of the eyes. At last follow-up, the mean spherical equivalent was reduced from −3.35±3.10 D to −0.02±0.30 D (P<0.001) with 97.5% of the eyes within ±0.50 D of emmetropia. The mean preoperative keratometric cylinder was 2.34±0.95 D and the mean postoperative refractive cylinder was 0.24±0.27 D (P<0.001). The mean IOL rotation was 2.43°±1.55°. None of the IOLs required realignment.

Conclusion

Precizon^® toric IOL revealed very good rotational stability and performance regarding predictability, efficacy, and safety in the correction of preexisting regular corneal astigmatism associated with cataract surgery.

Sub-Tenon's anaesthesia versus topical anaesthesia for cataract surgery

BACKGROUND

Local anaesthesia for cataract surgery can be provided by sub-Tenon's or topical anaesthesia. Both techniques offer possible advantages. This review, which originally was published in 2007 and was updated in 2014, was undertaken to compare these two anaesthetic techniques.

OBJECTIVES

Our objectives were to compare the effectiveness of topical anaesthesia (with or without intracameral local anaesthetic) versus sub-Tenon's anaesthesia in providing pain relief during cataract surgery. We reviewed pain during administration of anaesthesia, postoperative pain, surgical satisfaction with operating conditions and patient satisfaction with pain relief provided, and we looked at associated complications.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and EMBASE (last search in November 2014) and the reference lists of published articles. We looked for conferences abstracts and trials in progress and placed no constraints on language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized studies that compared sub-Tenon's anaesthesia versus topical anaesthesia for cataract surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed trial quality and extracted data in the format allowing maximal data inclusion.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight studies in this updated review but could retain in the analysis only seven studies on 742 operated eyes of 617 participants. Two cross-over trials included 125 participants, and five parallel trials included 492 participants. These studies were published between 1997 and 2005. The mean age of participants varied from 71.5 years to 83.5 years. The female proportion of participants varied from 54% to 76%. Compared with sub-Tenon's anaesthesia, topical anaesthesia (with or without intracameral injection) for cataract surgery increases intraoperative pain but decreases postoperative pain at 24 hours. The amplitude of the effect (equivalent to 1.1 on a score from 0 to 10 for intraoperative pain, and to 0.2 on the same scale for postoperative pain at 24 hours), although statistically significant, was probably too small to be of clinical relevance. The quality of the evidence was rated as high for intraoperative pain and moderate for pain at 24 hours. We did find differences in pain during administration of local anaesthetic (low level of evidence), and indications that surgeon satisfaction (low level of evidence) and participant satisfaction (moderate level of evidence) were less with topical anaesthesia. There was not enough evidence to say that one technique would result in a higher or lower incidence of intraoperative complications compared with the other.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Both topical anaesthesia and sub-Tenon's anaesthesia are accepted and safe methods of providing anaesthesia for cataract surgery. An acceptable degree of intraoperative discomfort has to be expected with either of these techniques. Randomized controlled trials on the effects of various strategies to prevent intraoperative pain during cataract surgery could prove useful.