Comparison of a panfocal and trifocal diffractive intraocular lens after femtosecond laser–assisted lens surgery

Visual Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction After Bilateral Refractive Lens Exchange With a Trifocal Intraocular Lens in 5,226 Patients With Presbyopia

PURPOSE

To assess visual and refractive outcomes and visual function after bilateral RayOne Trifocal toric and nontoric intraocular lens (IOL) (Rayner) implantation in patients with presbyopia.

METHODS

Charts of patients with presbyopia who underwent refractive lens exchange with bilateral implantation of the RayOne Trifocal IOL (toric and non-toric) were retrospectively reviewed. Visual and refractive outcomes were evaluated at 3 months. Patient satisfaction, spectacle independence, and visual disturbance profile were assessed by questionnaires.

RESULTS

A total of 5,226 patients were assigned to one of two groups: 1,010 patients had toric IOL implantation (toric group) and 4,216 patients received the non-toric model (non-toric group). Mean ± standard deviation visual acuity at 3 months for the toric group was binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 0.07 ± 0.11 logMAR, monocular corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) of 0.05 ± 0.07 logMAR, binocular uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) at 40 cm of 0.10 ± 0.09 logMAR, binocular uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) at 40 cm of 0.13 ± 0.12 logMAR, postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) of -0.21 ± 0.47 diopters (D), and cylinder of -0.34 ± 0.40 D. The non-toric group had binocular UDVA of 0.04 ± 0.08 logMAR, monocular CDVA of 0.05 ± 0.07 logMAR, binocular UNVA of 0.10 ± 0.08 logMAR, binocular UIVA of 0.13 ± 0.11 logMAR, SE of -0.08 ± 0.38 D, and cylinder of -0.28 ± 0.34 D. No statistically significant differences were found in achieving spectacle independence and there were high levels of satisfaction in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective analysis with more than 5,000 patients, both the toric and non-toric RayOne Trifocal IOL models provided good visual performance at all distances, resulting in excellent levels of spectacle independence and patient satisfaction. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(7):e468-e479.].

Visual Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction After Bilateral Refractive Lens Exchange with a Trifocal Intraocular Lens in Patients with Presbyopia

INTRODUCTION

Refractive lens exchange (RLE) patients represent a unique population with a different baseline and set of expectations compared to their cataract counterparts. Visual outcomes and patient satisfaction following RLE with bilateral implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) were assessed in a cohort of patients with presbyopia and without cataract.

METHODS

Charts of patients with presbyopia who underwent femtosecond laser-assisted RLE with bilateral implantation of the PanOptix trifocal IOL (toric and non-toric) at a single-surgeon, private practice center from September 2019 to August 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Eyes with prior keratorefractive surgery, amblyopia, or underlying pathology were excluded. Primary endpoints included corrected and uncorrected visual acuity at distance (CDVA and UDVA), intermediate (DCIVA and UIVA), and near (DCNVA and UNVA) at 6 months. Secondary endpoints included residual refractive error, patient-reported satisfaction, spectacle independence, and visual disturbance profile as assessed by a validated questionnaire at 6 months.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight eyes of 39 patients (mean age 56 ± 6 years; 79% female) were included. Most eyes were hyperopic (mean SE 2.35 ± 1.81). Postoperatively, 100% and 92% of eyes were within ± 1.00 D and ± 0.50 D of emmetropia, respectively. One hundred percent, 97%, and 97% of patients achieved UDVA, UNVA, and UIVA of logMAR 0.1 or better. Starbursts were the most frequent (67%) and bothersome (41%) visual disturbance cited, but nearly half (41%) of patients rated them as absent or "not bothersome at all." Overall, 77% of patients reported achieving complete spectacle independence with 87% and 90% of patients stating they were satisfied with their vision and would recommend the same procedure to others, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

RLE with bilateral implantation of the PanOptix IOL is a safe and effective procedure with good patient satisfaction. Because of their relatively clear native lenses and visually demanding needs compared to their cataract counterparts, surgeons should take extra precautions to counsel RLE patients on the limitations of trifocal technology.

Trifocal Intraocular Lens Selection: Predicting Visual Function From Optical Quality Measurements

PURPOSE

To apply in vitro quality metrics to assess and compare three trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs).

METHODS

The optical performance of the AT LISA tri 839MP (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG), AcrySof IQ PanOptix (Alcon Laboratories, Inc), and TECNIS Synergy (Johnson & Johnson Vision) was compared. The modulation transfer function (MTF) metrics were obtained using an optical bench set-up. A polychromatic light source and a model cornea inducing chromatic and spherical aberrations were used to mimic in vivo characteristics. The area under the MTF was calculated at each defocus position, which served as a parameter in a nonlinear formula applied to predict postoperative visual acuity (VA).

RESULTS

All of the studied IOLs had a predicted VA of 0.2 logMAR or better throughout the range of 0.00 to -3.00 diopters (D). Simulated VA differences between the IOLs were negligible (< 0.01 logMAR) at the far point. Although the three models were comparable at -1.00 D, at -2.00 D the AT LISA tri 839MP's VA was 0.06 and 0.08 logMAR worse than with the TECNIS Synergy and AcrySof IQ PanOptix, respectively. At near focus, the AcrySof IQ PanOptix's estimated VA was 0.06 logMAR (40 cm); for the AT LISA tri 839MP and TECNIS Synergy, it was 0.06 and 0.03 logMAR, respectively, at 36 cm.

CONCLUSIONS

Although simulated distance VA was comparable between the studied models, differences can be found in the intermediate focus' position and quality and the expected reading distance. Therefore, simulations of defocus curves from optical quality metrics provide insight into IOL characteristics and highlight differences between the IOLs, which may guide the selection of a trifocal lens based on patients' needs. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(2):111-118.].

Comparative Visual Outcome Analysis of a Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lens and a New Diffractive Multifocal Lens with Extended Depth of Focus

This study compares the visual and refractive performance of the TECNIS Synergy (DFR00V-DFW150-225-300-375) multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) and the AcrySof IQ PanOptix (TFAT00-30-40-50-60) multifocal IOL. Patients who underwent phacoemulsification and cataract extraction and received either a multifocal Synergy or PanOptix IOL were included. Monocular uncorrected distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA), near (UNVA), and corrected distance (CDVA) visual acuities were assessed at three and six months postoperatively. Secondary outcome measures of photic phenomena were also assessed. A total of 140 patients (224 eyes) were included in this study, with 69 patients (105 eyes) in the Synergy group and 71 patients (119 eyes) in the PanOptix group. There were no statistically significant differences in UIVA or CDVA measurements across all time points. When assessing UDVA, at three months postoperatively, there were more eyes in the PanOptix group with vision better than 20/40 (p = 0.04). At three and six months postoperatively, the average UNVA was superior in the Synergy group (p = 0.01, 0.002). While the Synergy group reported more night vision disturbances at one and three months (p = 0.01, 0.03), the PanOptix group had more night vision disturbances at six months (p = 0.02). Although not statistically significant, the AcrySof IQ PanOptix multifocal IOL demonstrated better UDVA and UIVA sooner postoperatively than the TECNIS Synergy multifocal IOL. The Synergy IOL provided statistically better UNVA compared to the PanOptix IOL at three and six months postoperatively. Synergy patients reported more early photic phenomena than PanOptix patients, which later diminished.

Visual Performance, Spectacle Independence, Visual disturbances and Patient Satisfaction after Cataract Surgery: Comparison of 2 Diffractive Intraocular Lenses in a Tertiary Hospital

Purpose:

This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of the AcrySof PanOptix intra-ocular lens and AT LISA tri 839MP trifocal IOL, 6 months after cataract surgery.

Patients and Methods:

This retrospective cohort study evaluated patients who underwent bilateral cataract surgery with diffractive IOL implantation. Patients were divided into two groups based on the IOL model implanted (AcrySof PanOptix IOL; AT LISA tri 839MP trifocal IOL). Study parameters were noted preoperatively (visual acuity only) and 6 months postoperatively. At the 6-month post-operative visit, both eyes were examined for the following: uncorrected distance visual acuity at far (6 m), uncorrected intermediate visual acuities (UIVA) at 80 cm and 60 cm, near uncorrected visual acuity at 40 cm, incidence of posterior capsule opacification, presence of subjective photic phenomena, in addition to a questionnaire assessing the quality of life and visual function.

Results:

Thirty nine patients (78 eyes) with diffractive IOLs (AT LISA, n=23; PanOptix n=16) were included. No statistical significance was found between the lenses. The median power of both implanted lenses was 21. Post-operatively, the AT LISA group showed slightly lower median UIVA than the PanOptix group at 60 cm and the reverse at 80 cm. A larger number of patients in the PanOptix group showed better performance at intermediate activities than in the AT LISA group. Posterior capsule opacification developed in significantly fewer eyes with PanOptix (6.2%) than with AT LISA (17.4%), none had double vision, and the photic phenomena were found troublesome by >20% of the patients in either group. Overall satisfaction was comparably high.

Conclusion:

Both IOLs had similar and favorable visual outcomes. However, PanOptix IOL had better performance at 60 cm in intermediate visual activities.

Visual performance, safety and patient satisfaction after bilateral implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens in presbyopic patients without cataract

Background

The aim was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) for the correction of presbyopia and to assess patient satisfaction.

Methods

Records from three centres were reviewed to select presbyopic patients having undergone bilateral refractive lens exchange and implantation of the AT LISA tri 839MP multifocal IOL. Postoperatively, monocular and binocular distance, intermediate and near visual acuities, corrected and uncorrected, and subjective refraction were measured. Patients also completed a quality of life questionnaire. Safety evaluation included IOL stability and postoperative complications.

Results

72 eyes (36 patients) were analysed. No clinically significant difference between pre- and postoperative corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was found for monocular or binocular measurements. Mean postoperative monocular CDVA was 0.02 ± 0.04 logMAR. Mean refractive values all improved statistically significantly compared with preoperative baseline (p ≤ 0.0064). Overall, 82.4% of eyes had spherical equivalent within ± 0.5 D and 97.1% within ± 1.0 D of emmetropia with a mean accuracy of -0.10 ± 0.41 D. Spectacle independence for distance, intermediate and near visual acuity was 87.5%, 84.4% and 78.1% respectively, and 78.1% of patients were satisfied with their postoperative, spectacle-free vision. Eight eyes received Nd:YAG laser treatment. No other IOL-related safety issues were reported.

Conclusion

AT LISA tri 839MP multifocal IOL bilaterally implanted in presbyopic patients provided excellent distance, intermediate and near visual outcomes with very accurate correction of refraction. These results were associated with a high level of spectacle independence and patient satisfaction.

Trial registration

Trial registered on https://clinicaltrials.gov/ under the identification NCT03790592 (31/12/2018).

Visual performance following implantation of presbyopia correcting intraocular lenses

OBJECTIVE

To compare the visual outcomes following bilateral implantation of 3 presbyopia correcting IOLs.

METHODS

Results are reported for patients who underwent phacoemulsification with bilateral implantation of one of the following IOLs: Panoptix IOL, AT LISA tri IOL and Symphony IOL. Six months postoperative examination included monocular UIVA at 80 and 60 cm and monocular UNVA and DCNVA at 40 cm, monocular UDVA and CDVA, Spherical equivalent (SE) refraction, binocular defocus curve, contrast sensitivity, photopic phenomena, and spectacle independence.

RESULTS

UIVA at 80 cm was significantly better in the AT LISA group and the Symfony groups than the Panoptix group, while UIVA at 60 cm was better in the Symfony group and the Panoptix group than the AT LISA group. A worse DCNVA was recorded in the Symfony group. At a defocus of -2.50 D, the near VA was similar in the PanOptix and AT LISA groups (0.05, 0.07 logMAR respectively), which were significantly better than the Symfony group (0.3 LogMAR). Binocular photopic and scotopic contrast sensitivity outcomes were similar among the three groups at all spatial frequencies. In Symphony group, the frequency and the degree of bother of photic phenomena was relatively higher than the other two groups. Higher percentage of patients in symphony group reported their need for reading glasses.

CONCLUSION

PanOptix IOL and AT LISA IOL would be a good choice for patients aiming for an optimum near vision, while Symfony IOL seems suitable for patients having the priority for good intermediate vision.

Visual and satisfaction results with implantation of the trifocal Panoptix® intraocular lens in cataract surgery

PURPOSE

To assess visual results (including the Lapid-Kushlin defocus coefficient), and satisfaction, following the implantation of PanOptix® a trifocal intraocular lens.

METHODS

Observational, retrospective cohort study. 130 eyes of 65 subjects with bilateral implantation were included. Binocular uncorrected visual acuities [distance (Binocular UDVA), intermediate (Binocular UIVA) and near (Binocular UNVA)] were measured. Also, the manifest refraction, binocular defocus curve and binocular contrast sensitivity were determined. The Lapid-Kushlin defocus coefficient, a new single numerical parameter based on the area under the curve of the defocus curve, was calculated. The validated Spanish CATQUEST-9SF satisfaction survey was applied.

RESULTS

Postoperative visual acuity ranges were: binocular UDVA 0.18 to 0.0 LogMAR, binocular UIVA 0.30 to 0.0 LogMAR and Binocular UNVA 0.18 to 0.0 LogMAR. The levels of contrast sensitivity both in bright light conditions (with and without glare) and low light conditions with glare, remained within the limits of normality. Under scotopic conditions without glare values below normality were found at lower spatial frequencies. The binocular defocus curve showed a plateau without a clearly evident peak. The Lapid-Kushlin defocus coefficient was 0.199. Two patients (3.1%) needed glasses after the procedure for near and intermediate vision. No patient manifested great visual difficulties or was dissatisfied with the results.

CONCLUSIONS

The trifocal platform showed very good results in this series of patients. 96.9% of the patients achieved independence of the glasses and expressed a high degree of satisfaction. The Lapid-Kushlin defocus coefficient was better than those calculated from literature, for other multifocal intraocular lenses.

Defocus curves: Focusing on factors influencing assessment

ABSTRACT

Defocus curve assessment is used to emulate defocus over a range of distances and is a valuable tool that is used to differentiate the performance of presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses. However, defocus curves are limited by a lack of standardization, and multiple factors can impact their generation and interpretation. This review discusses key factors that influence the assessment of defocus curves, including pupil size, level of contrast, sphere versus cylinder defocus, viewing distance, monocular versus binocular assessment, use of Snellen versus logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution charts, and diopter range and step size. There are also different methods to analyze defocus curves, including the direct comparison method, range-of-focus analysis, and area under the curve analysis, which can impact result interpretation. A good understanding of these factors and standardization of the methodology are important to ensure optimal cross-study comparisons.

Rethinking presbyopia: results of bilateral refractive lens exchange with trifocal intraocular lenses in 17 603 patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of bilateral refractive lens exchange (RLE) with trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) as the surgical treatment of presbyopia.

SETTINGS

Memira AS. Norway, Sweden and Denmark.

DESIGN

Multicentric retrospective interventional case series.

METHODS

17 603 consecutive patients submitted to bilateral presbyopic RLE with trifocal IOLs from 2013 to 2019. The main outcomes were manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE), uncorrected distance (UDVA) and near (UNVA) visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), vision gain/loss, safety and efficacy indices, IOL power calculation accuracy and rate of excimer laser enhancements.

RESULTS

Three months postoperatively, the mean MRSE was 0.00±0.40 diopters (D), mean binocular UDVA was -0.03±0.09, with 14 470 patients (82.2%) with combined binocular UDVA and UNVA equal or better than 0.00 and Jaeger 3. Approximately 86% (n=30.124) of the eyes were within 0.50D of MRSE. Enhancement surgery was performed in 5810 eyes (16.5%). IOL power calculation refining improved accuracy and reduced enhancements rate from 20% in 2013 to 12% in 2019. Safety and efficacy indices were 0.98±0.11 and 0.85±0.18, respectively. Myopic eyes presented significant higher safety (1.00±0.19) and efficacy indices (0.87±0.19), with p<0.005. Approximately 0.38% (n=130) of the eyes lost two or more lines of CDVA, with cystoid macular oedema (n=53, 40.8%) and posterior capsular opacification (n=35, 26.9%) as the main causes. After proper care, the final incidence of two or more lines of vision loss was 0.08% (28 eyes).

CONCLUSIONS

Presbyopic RLE with trifocal IOL is a safe and effective modality of treatment for patients with presbyopia.

Patient-Reported Quality of Life and Satisfaction After Refractive Lens Extraction Using a Diffractive Trifocal IOL: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

To assess patient satisfaction and quality of life after refractive lens exchange with a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL).

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent refractive lens exchange with the AT LISA tri or AT LISA tri toric IOL (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) at one of five surgical centers were surveyed for their quality of life and satisfaction after surgery using a standardized questionnaire. Patient responses were compared to patient characteristics such as age, sex, axial lengths, and preoperative refraction.

RESULTS

A total of 102 patients with 204 treated eyes were included in the analysis. The mean age was 54.6 ± 5.2 years. A total of 172 eyes were hypermetropic, 3 were emmetropic, and 25 were myopic, with a mean preoperative refractive error of 0.93 ± 2.17 diopters. Reported postoperative satisfaction was as follows: 81.4% stated that their expectations were completely met and 17.6% stated that they were partially met. Self-reported refractive error quality of life improved significantly in all queried areas of life. Most frequently reported postoperative limitations were driving at night and driving in bad weather conditions. Halos were reported by 91 (90.1%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient satisfaction and self-reported quality of life after refractive lens exchange with the AT LISA tri or AT LISA tri toric IOL was high. Glare and halos remain the only significant drawback of the procedure, leading to 40% of patients experiencing difficulties in night driving. Preoperative communication of these drawbacks is obligatory to avoid postoperative disappointment. [J Refract Surg. 2021;37(11):768-774.].

Patient Expectation, Satisfaction and Clinical Outcomes with a New Multifocal Intraocular Lens

Purpose

To report patient expectations, visual performance and satisfaction with AcrySof IQ PanOptix multifocal intraocular lens in a heterogeneous patient group. Additionally, determine if identifiable pre-operative characteristics can predict post-operative satisfaction.

Methods

Data were prospectively collected for 67 consecutive patients (134 eyes) who underwent bilateral Panoptix implantation in a private ophthalmology clinic. A pre-operative questionnaire was completed regarding vision satisfaction, visual phenomena and expectations. Routine clinical parameters were collected 1 month and follow-up questionnaire administered 3 months post-operatively.

Results

Post-operative unaided distance vision was 20/20 (0.01 ± 0.10) and binocular near vision 20/25^-2 (N5; 0.14 ± 0.06). Patients satisfied with vision increased from 6% (n=4) unaided and 48% (n=32) aided pre-operatively to 94% (n=63) unaided post-operatively (p<0.001). There was marked increase in frequency of halo from 14% (n=9) to 69% (n=46; p<0.001) but no corresponding increase in how bothersome this symptom was (p=0.193) nor the frequency of other visual phenomena. Worse post-operative vision and fluctuating vision were associated with lower post-operative satisfaction. There was no difference in satisfaction or residual astigmatism in those implanted with toric lenses. A total of 96% (n=64) of patients were spectacle-free at 3-months and would recommend this procedure to others.

Conclusion

This study supports the trend towards increased patient expectations of multifocal intraocular lenses, matched by excellent visual outcomes and satisfaction. Visual phenomena may be less troubling with new multifocal lenses than previously reported. A pre-operative questionnaire may be a useful education tool but could not isolate pre-operative characteristics that predict post-operative satisfaction.

Citation network analysis of the various types of multifocal intraocular lenses

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The implantation of multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) has increased in recent years, allowing patients to achieve good quality vision at all distances, independence from use of glasses, and consequently, an increase in quality of life. The main purpose of this study was to analyse the links between publications and authors via citation networks, as well to as identify the different research areas and determine the most cited publications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The publication search was performed through the Web of Science database, using the terms «Multifocal intraocular lens», «Bifocal intraocular lens», «Trifocal intraocular lens», «Diffractive intraocular lens», «Refractive intraocular lens», «Accommodative intraocular lens» and «Extended depth of focus intraocular lens», for a time interval from 1989 to August 2020. The software used to analyse the publications was the Citation Network Explorer.

RESULTS

A total of 1293 publications were found, with 11,730 citations generated in the network, and 2019 had the highest number of publications of any year. The most cited publication was «European multicenter study of the AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive intraocular lens» by Kohnen et al., published in 2006. Four groups about different research areas in this field were found using the Clustering functionality: visual quality, IOL designs, ocular aberrations, or defocus curves.

CONCLUSIONS

The citation network offers an objective and comprehensive analysis of the main articles on the different designs and classes of multifocal IOL.

Visual Performance Following Bilateral Implantation of Refractive Rotationally Asymmetric Bifocal Intraocular Lens (LS-313 MF30) or Apodized Diffractive Bifocal Intraocular Lens (ReSTOR SN6AD1)

Purpose

This study compared the clinical outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of refractive rotationally asymmetric bifocal intraocular lens (IOL) (LS-313 MF30) and apodized diffractive bifocal IOL (ReSTOR SN6AD1).

Methods

This was a prospective, non-randomized, controlled study, where patients diagnosed with age-related cataracts were selected for phacoemulsification combined with bilateral IOL implantation. Based on the type of IOL voluntarily implanted, the patients were divided into two groups, ie, refractive and diffractive groups. In total, 30 cases (60 eyes) were in a refractive group, while 30 cases (60 eyes) were in diffractive group. Three months after surgery, we examined the uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), defocus curve, objective visual quality, and subjective questionnaire.

Results

Three months after surgery, the UIVA of the refractive group (0.18 ± 0.08) logMAR was better than that of the diffractive group (0.29 ± 0.16) logMAR (P < 0.05). No significant difference in UDVA and UNVA was noted between the two groups. For a 4mm pupil diameter, the intraocular and total eye aberration, higher-order aberration (HOA), coma, spherical aberration, and trefoil in the refractive group were significantly higher than those in diffractive group (P < 0.05). The intraocular modulation transfer function (MTF), intraocular strehl ratio (SR), total eye MTF, and total eye SR in the refractive group were lower than those in diffractive group (P < 0.05). No significant difference in glare incidence, spectacle independence rate, and patient satisfaction was observed between the two groups (P > 0.05). The halos incidence in the refractive group was lower than the diffractive group (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Both bifocal IOLs obtained satisfactory UDVA and UNVA, with higher patient satisfaction. Unlike the apodized diffractive bifocal IOL, the refractive rotationally asymmetric bifocal IOL yielded slightly better UIVA, lower halos incidence, whereas the apodized diffractive bifocal IOL showed a better objective visual quality.

Visual and patient-reported factors leading to satisfaction after implantation of diffractive EDOF and trifocal intraocular lenses

PURPOSE

To evaluate factors that influence postoperative satisfaction in patients with diffractive EDOF and multifocal IOLs.

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany.

DESIGN

Observational case study.

METHODS

Patients were evaluated after implantation of a diffractive EDOF (Symfony, J&J, USA; AT LARA, CZM, Germany) or tri-/quadrifocal (AT LISAtri, CZM, Germany; Panoptix, Alcon, USA) 3 months postoperatively. A subjective refraction was performed, uncorrected and corrected visual acuity was tested for distance (UDVA, CDVA), intermediate (at 60 & 80cm, UIVA, DCIVA), and near (at 40cm, UNVA, DCNVA). A test for contrast sensitivity was done and the patients filled out two different questionnaires on daily activities and optical phenomena. Parameters with a potential correlation to the postoperative overall satisfaction were investigated.

RESULTS

We included 94 patients with a mean age of 66 years ± 19. Patients with a better UDVA and UIVA at 60cm were more likely to choose the same IOL again. The intensity of subjective optical phenomena and the visual quality at different tasks of daily living influenced the overall satisfaction. UIVA at 80cm, UNVA, and corrected VA demonstrated no significant influence on patient satisfaction. The uncorrected visual acuity at specific distances had a direct impact on the subjective visual quality regarding the task performed at those distances.

CONCLUSION

For patients with diffractive EDOF and multifocal IOLs, the UDVA and UIVA at 60cm seem to be more important than the UNVA and UIVA at 80cm. Subjective visual quality and optical phenomena influence patient satisfaction, as well.

Near visual acuity and patient-reported outcomes in presbyopic patients after bilateral multifocal aspheric laser in situ keratomileusis excimer laser surgery

PURPOSE

To determine improvement of near visual acuity by bilateral multifocal aspheric laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) treatments in presbyopic patients.

SETTING

Goethe-University, Frankfurt, Germany.

DESIGN

Prospective, nonrandomized trial.

METHODS

Thirty presbyopic patients underwent LASIK treatment with a multifocal aspheric ablation profile using an excimer laser (PresbyMAX). The first 15 patients received a multifocal aspheric ablation profile combined with micromonovision. For the consecutive 15 patients, less depth of focus was included on the distance eye (hybrid). Outcome parameters were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuities, uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), and distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA); manifest refraction spherical equivalent; subjective quality of vision; and spectacle independence.

RESULTS

The data of 29 patients were analyzed and showed that binocular CDVA changed from -0.16 ± 0.10 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) preoperatively to 0.05 ± 0.20 logMAR UDVA and -0.06 ± 0.14 logMAR CDVA (P = .000, P = .001) 1 year postoperatively. Near visual acuity improved from 0.47 ± 0.13 logMAR (DCNVA) and 0.48 ± 0.26 logMAR (UNVA) to 0.19 ± 0.19 logMAR (DCNVA, P < .001) and 0.05 ± 0.15 logMAR (UNVA, P < .001). The hybrid and the μ-monovision group did not differ statistically except for a better DCNVA in the µ-monovision patients (0.21 ± 0.15 logMAR vs 0.34 ± 0.17 logMAR, P = .034). Of the hybrid and µ-monovision patients, 21 (72%) and 12 (41%) had a binocular CDVA and UDVA of 20/20 or better, 8 patients (28%) lost 1 line, 3 (10%) lost 2 lines, 4 (14%) lost 3 lines, and 2 (7%) lost 4 lines of CDVA.

CONCLUSIONS

The PresbyMAX laser seemed to satisfy most of the patients, although they experienced a loss of CDVA. The gain of near visual acuity and therefore reported less need of spectacles seemed to compensate for this loss.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of 3 trifocal IOLs

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical outcomes obtained after implantation of 1 of 3 models of diffractive trifocal IOLs.

SETTING

Hospital da Luz, Lisbon, Portugal.

DESIGN

Prospective randomized comparative study.

METHODS

Patients undergoing cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of 1 of 3 models of diffractive trifocal IOLs were enrolled. The IOL models implanted were the FineVision POD F, RayOne Trifocal, or the AcrySof IQ PanOptix IOL (30 eyes of 15 patients in each group). Visual acuity (VA), refraction, defocus curve, and contrast sensitivity outcomes were evaluated during a 3-month follow-up. Furthermore, the Quality of Vision questionnaire (QoV) was used to evaluate the frequency, severity, and discomfort of different visual symptoms.

RESULTS

A total of 90 eyes of 45 patients were included. No statistically significant differences were found between groups in distance, intermediate, and near VA (P ≥ .112) and postoperative refraction (P ≥ .059). Postoperative binocular uncorrected intermediate VA of 0.10 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) or better was found in 14 (93.33%) patients in the 3 groups. Postoperative binocular uncorrected near VA of 0.10 logMAR or better was found in 13 (86.67%), 14 (93.33%), and 13 (86.67%) patients in the POD F, RayOne, and PanOptix IOLs groups, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found between groups in scotopic contrast sensitivity with and without glare and in the QoV scores (P ≥ .057), except for the difference between the POD F and RayOne IOLs groups in depth perception severity, which was less in the RayOne IOL group (P = .019).

CONCLUSIONS

The 3 trifocal IOLs evaluated provided a complete visual restoration with good visual quality outcomes.

Comparison Between Bilateral Implantation of a Trifocal IOL and Mix-and-Match Implantation of a Bifocal IOL and an Extended Depth of Focus IOL

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical outcomes of mix-and-match implantation of a diffractive extended depth of focus intraocular lens (IOL) (TECNIS Symfony ZXR00; Johnson & Johnson Vision) and a diffractive bifocal IOL (TECNIS ZLB00 +3.25 diopters [D]; Johnson & Johnson Vision) and bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal IOL (AcrySof IQ PanOptix; Alcon Laboratories, Inc).

METHODS

This prospective comparative study compares the clinical outcomes of patients with age-related cataract undergoing cataract surgery using the IOLs described. Patients were divided into the mix-and-match group and the trifocal group. Assessment included monocular and binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), intermediate visual acuity (UIVA at 60 cm), and near visual acuity (UNVA at 40 cm), uncorrected defocus curves, contrast sensitivity, and reading speed. Quality of vision was measured with the Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25).

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients (25 in each group) were enrolled. At 6 months postoperatively, outcomes of binocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA were similar in both groups. The binocular defocus curve only differed at vergences of -0.50 to -1.00 D (better for the mix-and-match group; P = .032 and .004, respectively) and at -4.00 D (better for the trifocal group; P = .001). Significantly higher reading speeds in the mix-and-match group were measured at 0.7 and 0.5 logMAR (P = .038 and .034, respectively). There were no significant differences between groups for contrast sensitivity and the results of the questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

The mix-and-match implantation seemed to be a good option for patients with high demands for distance and intermediate visual acuity, whereas the trifocal IOL appeared to be more suitable for patients with enhanced near vision demands. [J Refract Surg. 2020;36(8):528-535.].

Tolerance to Residual Refractive Errors After Trifocal and Trifocal Toric Intraocular Lens Implantation

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of 0.50 diopter (D) positive or negative defocus on visual function in patients implanted with trifocal and trifocal toric intraocular lenses (IOLs).

METHODS

The study included patients implanted with the AcrySof IQ PanOptix IOL or the PanOptix Toric. Visual acuity (VA) at high (100%), medium (50%) and low (10%) contrast, contrast sensitivity function (CSF), and halo perception were assessed three months after surgery. Explorations were performed with corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), with a positive defocus of +0.50D (myopization) and with a negative defocus of -0.50D (hyperopization).

RESULTS

The study included 60 eyes of 60 patients (30 eyes with PanOptix and 30 eyes with PanOptix Toric). For both groups, VA was better for all contrast settings at the CDVA situation (P<0.05 in all cases). For low spatial frequencies, no differences in CSF were found among the three refractive situations in either group. For higher frequencies, the results showed an overall trend for better CSF results for the CDVA situation. The halo effect was lower for the CDVA situation if compared to myopization and hyperopization in both the PanOptix and the PanOptix Toric groups (P<0.05 for all cases).

CONCLUSIONS

There is an impact on visual quality and halo perception in patients implanted with trifocal or trifocal toric IOLs even for low residual refractive errors.

Citation network analysis of the various types of multifocal intraocular lenses

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The implantation of multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) has increased in recent years, allowing patients to achieve good quality vision at all distances, independence from use of glasses, and consequently, an increase in quality of life. The main purpose of this study was to analyse the links between publications and authors via citation networks, as well to as identify the different research areas and determine the most cited publications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The publication search was performed through the Web of Science database, using the terms «Multifocal intraocular lens», «Bifocal intraocular lens», «Trifocal intraocular lens», «Diffractive intraocular lens», «Refractive intraocular lens», «Accommodative intraocular lens» and «Extended depth of focus intraocular lens», for a time interval from 1989 to August 2020. The software used to analyse the publications was the Citation Network Explorer.

RESULTS

A total of 1293 publications were found, with 11730 citations generated in the network, and 2019 had the highest number of publications of any year. The most cited publication was «European multicenter study of the AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive intraocular lens» by Kohnen et al., published in 2006. Four groups about different research areas in this field were found using the Clustering functionality: visual quality, IOL designs, ocular aberrations, or defocus curves.

CONCLUSIONS

The citation network offers an objective and comprehensive analysis of the main articles on the different designs and classes of multifocal IOL.

Clinical Outcomes After Bilateral Implantation of a Trifocal Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lens in an Indian Population

Purpose

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of a presbyopia-correcting trifocal intraocular lens (IOL), AcrySof^® IQ PanOptix^® (TFNT00), in an Indian population.

Patients and Methods

This prospective, multicenter, observational, single-arm, post-marketing study included 67 patients undergoing cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of TFNT00 across five Indian sites. Postoperative outcomes were assessed at 3 months after second eye surgery. Effectiveness outcomes included: mean binocular and monocular visual acuity (VA) at distance (4 m), intermediate (60 cm), and near (40 cm); binocular defocus curve; manifest refraction; and subjective symptom questionnaire evaluation. Safety outcomes included the rate of ocular adverse events and mesopic contrast sensitivity.

Results

Mean binocular and monocular distance-corrected and uncorrected VAs of 0.1 logMAR or better (approximately 20/25 Snellen) were achieved at distance, intermediate, and near. Overall, ≥70% of patients achieved binocular 0.1 logMAR vision or better across all distances. TFNT00 maintained a mean VA of 0.1 logMAR or better at the defocus range of +0.5 diopters (D) to –2.5 D (200 cm to 40 cm). The subjective symptom questionnaire-assessed frequency of halo visual disturbances was low at Month 3; halos were reported “none of the time” to “only some of the time” in 86.6% of patients. The large majority of patients (98.5%) were “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with their near, intermediate, and distance vision at Month 3, and ≥94.0% of patients reported spectacle independence for tasks at all distances. The adverse event rate was low; no patients discontinued due to an adverse event.

Conclusion

TFNT00 provided a continuous range of vision of 20/25 or better for distance to near and performed effectively at an intermediate functional distance of 60 cm, resulting in high levels of spectacle independence and patient satisfaction. TFNT00 demonstrated a good safety profile and a low post-operative frequency of halo visual disturbances.

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.

Standard Results and Contrast Sensitivity Reestablishment after Implantation of a Trifocal Intraocular Lens

PURPOSE/AIM

To assess, following the standards, the results of safety, efficacy and predictability for a trifocal intraocular lens and to evaluate contrast sensitivity and visual acuity defocus curve.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty subjects operated on cataract surgery or refractive lens exchange with a trifocal intraocular lens have been recruited for the study. The monocular uncorrected visual acuity (VA) at far, intermediate (67 cm) and near (40 cm) distances in addition to corrected VA at far and near distances was evaluated at 1 week, 1 month and 3 months after surgery. Postoperative refraction, binocular contrast sensitivity function (CSF) and binocular defocus curves were also collected at the 3-month follow-up visit.

RESULTS

Mean uncorrected VA was 0.10, 0.07 and 0.05 logMAR at far, intermediate and near distances. Corrected distance VA at far and near distances was 0.04 and 0.02 logMAR. Ninety percent and 100% achieved a spherical equivalent in ±0.50 D and ±1.00 D, respectively. CSF was above normal range for 12 and 18 cycles per degree (cpd) in all the conditions, inside the normal range in 1.5, 3 and 6 cpd and only decreased below normal range for 1.5 and 3 cpd in mesopic vision without glare.

CONCLUSIONS

The procedure achieved a safety, efficacy and predictability similar to those reported by previous studies. The CSF was generally enhanced after the procedure in comparison to those reported in non-operated subjects above 60 years old. Previous studies might underestimate the effective distance of the intermediate and near foci.

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.

Patients satisfaction and clinical outcomes of binocular implantation of a new trifocal intraocular lens

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical outcomes following bilateral implantation of PanOptix intraocular lens (IOL).

METHODS

This study included consecutive patients scheduled to undergo cataract or refractive lens exchange surgery between October 2017 and June 2018 at two centers. Manifest refraction, uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA, 60 cm) and uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA, 40 cm), defocus curves, presence of dysphotopsia, need for spectacles, presence of posterior capsule opacification and visual function were evaluated at 6 months after surgery.

RESULTS

The IOL was implanted in 138 eyes of 69 patients. The mean binocular UDVA was 0.02 ± 0.05 logMAR, UIVA 0.06 ± 0.07 logMAR and UNVA 0.05 ± 0.07 logMAR. Defocus curve showed two peaks at 0.00 D and - 1.50 D. Complete spectacle independence was reported in 94.2% of the patients. The mean VF-14 test result was 97.7 ± 2.2 (93.2-100). Only one patient (1.4%) reported seeing bothersome halos. The presence of posterior capsule opacification was noted in seven eyes (10%), whereas Nd:Yag capsulotomy was required only in one eye.

CONCLUSIONS

This trifocal IOL provided excellent visual outcomes at all distances with high spectacle independence and patient's satisfaction.

Refractive and Visual Outcomes After Bilateral Implantation of a Trifocal Intraocular Lens in a Large Population

Purpose

To review refractive, visual acuity, defocus curve and contrast sensitivity results after bilateral implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) in a large population.

Setting

One site in Santiago, Chile.

Design

Single arm, non-randomized retrospective chart review.

Methods

This was a single-arm retrospective chart review of clinical outcomes after bilateral implantation of a trifocal IOL (Panoptix^®), both toric and non-toric versions. Binocular visual acuity at 4 m, 60 cm and 40 cm was tested. Other tests included refraction, mesopic and photopic contrast sensitivity, and defocus curve measurement.

Results

The review included 500 eyes of 250 patients implanted with the trifocal IOL and 200 eyes of 100 patients implanted with the trifocal toric IOL, with no clinically significant differences between groups. Ninety-six percent of all eyes were within 0.50D of the intended spherical equivalent correction. In the toric group, 94% of eyes (187/200) had a residual refractive cylinder ≤0.50D, compared to 81% of eyes (406/500) in the non-toric group. Four out of five patients (80.6%, 282/350) had a binocular uncorrected VA of 0.1 logMAR (20/25) at all test distances. Mean defocus was 0.1 logMAR or better from vergences from 0.00 to -3.00 D (corresponding to vision from distance to about 33 cm). With a cutoff of 0.2 logMAR, 96% of patients had a range of vision 2.5 D or greater. Contrast sensitivity was similar between the toric and non-toric lenses, and similar to age-matched normal results.

Conclusion

The non-toric and toric trifocal IOLs provided good distance, intermediate and near vision to patients, with a wide range of vision and good contrast sensitivity.

Results of a clinical evaluation of a trifocal intraocular lens in Japan

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of a new trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) after cataract removal in patients living in Japan.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective multicenter clinical study.

METHODS

One hundred and thirty-five eyes of 68 patients (19 men, 49 women; mean age, 66.3 ± 7.4 years) were followed for 6 months. Trifocal IOLs with focal points at near, intermediate, and distance were implanted bilaterally in eyes with less than 1 diopter of corneal astigmatism. The visual acuity (VA) at distance, 60 and 40 centimeters (cm), and contrast sensitivities were measured. Patients completed quality-of-life questionnaires preoperatively and postoperatively.

RESULTS

The mean bilateral logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution VA at 5 meters (m), 60 cm, and 40 cm were, respectively: uncorrected, - 0.104 ± 0.095, - 0.065 ± 0.111, and - 0.042 ± 0.105; and distance-corrected, - 0.197 ± 0.076, - 0.112 ± 0.111, and - 0.073 ± 0.111. The contrast sensitivities at distance and near were within the normal range at all spatial frequencies under photopic conditions. Patients reported complete spectacle independence in 75.0% of cases. Total use of spectacles was reported by 1.5% and partial by 20.6%; the purpose of spectacle use was primarily for near visual tasks. Mild-to-moderate glare was reported by 65.7% of patients and halos by 70.1%; only 1.5% of subjects reported severe glare and halos.

CONCLUSIONS

This new trifocal IOL provides equally good uncorrected VAs at distance, intermediate, and near, and decreases spectacle dependence in daily life. Patients frequently report mild-to-moderate glare and halos, and patients should be informed about these before implantation.

Model of the light sword intraocular lens: in-vitro comparative studies

This work presents the first models of light sword intraocular lenses (LS IOLs) with angularly modulated optical power. We performed an experimental, comparative study with multifocal and extended depth of focus intraocular lenses, which are available on the market. The measurements conducted in an original optical bench were utilised for an analysis of point spread functions, elongated foci, modulation transfer functions and the areas defined by them. The LS IOL models perform homogeneous imaging in the whole range of designed defocus. The proposed concept of extended depth of focus seems to be promising for the development of presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses capable of regaining fully functional vision.

Subjective Perception Of Trifocal IOL Performance, Including Toric Models

Purpose

To study the patients’ perception of trifocal IOL (Panoptix™) performance.

Patients and methods

60 eyes of 35 were implanted with trifocal IOL. Refractive (sphere – S, cylinder – Cyl and spherical equivalent – SE, all in D) and visual (distance uncorrected – VAsc, distance corrected – VAcc, intermediate – IntVA, near uncorrected – NVAsc and distance corrected near – NVAcc, all in LogMAR) results were recorded. Patients were asked about satisfaction (per eye), spectacle independence, near and intermediate activities, distance activities in quantity and quality, finally about personal facial care (per patient). Comparison was made between non-toric (48) and toric models, genders (18 males) and between bilateral (25 patients) and unilateral implantations. Results were correlated to age and IOL power.

Results

With a SE of mean −0.3 ± 0.5 D, cases achieved mean VAsc 0.09 ± 0.1 (~20/25), VAcc 0.05 ± 0.1 (~20/22), IntVA 0.05 ± 0.9 (~20/22), NVAsc 0.05 ± 0.09 (~~20/22) and NVAcc 0.04 ± 0.8 (~~20/22). Mean level of satisfaction was 85.7 ± 16.5, spectacle independence 96.0 ± 10.6, near activities 95.4 ± 9.8, intermediate activities 97.7 ± 6.4, quantity of distance activities 90.2 ± 10.1, quality of distance activities 88.0 ± 12.1 and facial care 92.6 ± 11.9. All comparisons (non-toric and toric, male and female and bilateral and unilateral implantation) were statistically insignificant (P>0.05). Correlation with age and IOL power was also statistically insignificant (P>0.05).

Conclusion

As perceived by patients, trifocal IOL resulted in very high level of satisfaction. This satisfaction is reflected on diverse visual activities. This level is achieved regardless of gender, IOL model or even unilateral implantation. It is also achieved regardless the age of patients or preoperative eye status.

Novel Triamcinolone Acetonide-Loaded Liposomal Topical Formulation Improves Contrast Sensitivity Outcome After Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery

Purpose: To assess visual results, macular modifications, and the incidence of clinically significant macular edema (CSME) in patients using a topical triamcinolone acetonide-loaded liposomal formulation (TA-LF) after femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS). Methods: Fifty-six eyes after FLACS were selected. Twenty-eight eyes in the combined therapy group (P + N) were treated with prednisolone 1% and nepafenac 0.1% for 21 days postoperatively, whereas 28 eyes in the TA-LF group received a liposomal formulation containing 2 mg/mL of TA (0.2%) for the same period of time. Follow-up visits at 1 day, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks after surgery consisted of visual acuity, contrast sensitivity (CS), central foveal thickness (CFT), total macular volume (TMV) measurements, and the detection of CSME. Results: CS improved in the TA-LF group (basal value: 1.087 ± 0.339 vs. 1.276 ± 0.147 at week 12, P = 0.0346), whereas in the P + N group, CS was not different from the baseline (basal value: 1.130 ± 0.331 vs. 1.274 ± 0.133 at week 12, P = 0.1276). There were similar increases in postoperative CFT and TMV in both groups. CFT and TMV significantly correlate with CS only in the TA-LF group. The r² for CFT and CS was 0.1963 (P = 0.0206), whereas the r² for TMV and CS was 0.3615 (P = 0.0007) at 12 weeks. No difference was observed in the incidence of CSME between the groups. Conclusion: TA-LF is associated with better CS outcomes compared to combined therapy after FLACS.

Comparison of visual outcomes after bilateral implantation of two intraocular lenses with distinct diffractive optics

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare the visual outcomes and subjective visual quality between bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus intraocular lens, J&J Vision Tecnis Symfony^® ZXR00 (Group A) and bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens, Alcon Acrysof IQ PanOptix^® TNFT00 (Group B).

Methods

This prospective, nonrandomized, comparative study of consecutive cases assessed 52 eyes of 26 patients operated on by the same surgeon (WTH) and binocularly implanted with multifocal intraocular lenses between May 2016 and July 2018. Binocular visual acuity for far, intermediate and near was tested in all cases. Ophthalmological evaluation included the measurement of binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) at 40 cm, uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) at 70 cm, monocular visual defocus curve and the quality of life (QoL) questionnaire, National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire - 25 ( NEI-VFQ 25).

Results

Postoperative UDVA was 0.00 and 0.09 logMAR (P<0.001), UIVA was 0.20 and 0.39 logMAR (P<0.001) and UNVA was 0.16 and -0.01 logMAR (P<0.001) in groups A and B, respectively; postoperative CDVA was -0.05 and 0.06 logMAR (P<0.001) in groups A and B, respectively.

Conclusion

Both groups reported good subjective quality of vision regarding long, intermediate and short distances. Group A had a better performance for binocular UDVA, UIVA at 70 cm and CDVA, while regarding the monocular defocus curve, Group A outperformed Group B for long distances. Furthermore, Group B surpassed it in the short to very short distances, between the range of ≥2.00 D to 5.00 D of vergence. While Group A had a better performance regarding the vergences between 0.00 and 1.00 D (P<0.05) and at the vergence of +2.50 D (P=0.007). Group B outran Group A for UNVA at 40 cm.