Patient-Perceived and Laboratory-Measured Halos Associated with Diffractive Bifocal and Trifocal Intraocular Lenses

[Optical benchtop evaluation of special intraocular lens optics]

Intraocular lenses (IOL) featuring complex optical designs can pose a challenge in understanding their performance, which may hinder making an informed decision when selecting suitable lenses for patients. This underlines the importance of collecting optical quality data of IOLs and making them available. The deployment of benchtop systems for IOL testing offers not only insights into the design features of various IOL solutions but also provides a platform for objective comparisons of special optics designs, including information about their susceptibility to photic phenomena. Recent advances in IOL testing have improved the ability to predict functional effects on visual acuity and contrast sensitivity from objective optical quality metrics. This, for instance, can be used to study monofocal lenses and the impact of asphericity on vision and IOLs tolerance to misalignment. Monofocal-plus IOLs consistently show only a slight improvement in the depth of focus when tested on the optical bench and in clinical settings. Although the pupil dependence found in this technology may limit the advantages of monofocal-plus over standard monofocal technology to extend the range of vision, it is the key to reduce photic phenomena. Refractive and diffractive extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOLs can effectively enhance intermediate vision, with the latter offering a slightly broader depth of focus but potentially increasing the risk of dysphotopsia. However, the limitation of EDOF IOLs is that they often fail to deliver spectacle independence for reading, which can be overcome by trifocal technology. Still, the available trifocal IOLs differ in their location of intermediate and near foci and the susceptibility to produce glare effects. Therefore, the knowledge from optical benchtop testing of IOLs can support optimizing the IOL selection by aligning the patient's visual needs with the IOL's properties, setting the right expectations, and assessing the risk profile for the occurrence of photic phenomena, potentially leading to improved decision-making.

Tolerance to induced astigmatism of patients with trifocal or extended depth of focus intraocular lens implantation

Background

Residual astigmatism is common after cataract surgery involving implantation of an intraocular lens, yet the tolerance of presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens to astigmatism of different magnitudes and axes is poorly understood. Here we compared visual acuity and quality in the presence of induced astigmatism after implantation of a trifocal or extended-depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lens, the two widely used presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses.

Methods

At least 3 months after implantation of a TFNT00 or ZXR00 intraocular lens, patients were analyzed by slit-lamp examination, non-contact tonometry, subjective refraction, iTrace aberrometry, and corneal topography. After correction of residual astigmatism, astigmatism of different magnitudes on different axes was induced using cylindrical lenses, and overall visual acuity was measured, while objective visual quality was measured using the Optical Quality Analysis System II. Subjects were also asked about subjective visual quality using the Visual Function-14 questionnaire.

Results

Comparison of 18 individuals who received a trifocal lens and 19 who received an EDOF lens showed that objective visual quality was better in the EDOF group regardless of the magnitude or axis of the induced astigmatism. In both groups, astigmatism of at least -1.00 DC influenced distant vision more severely when the axis was 45° than 0° or 90°, meanwhile astigmatism of at least -1.50 DC influenced near and intermediate vision more severely when the axis was 45° than 0° or 90°.

Conclusion

Trifocal or EDOF intraocular lenses are less tolerant of oblique astigmatism than astigmatism with or against the rule. EDOF lenses may provide better objective visual quality than trifocal lenses in the presence of astigmatism, regardless of its magnitude or axis.

Optical quality in vitro and in vivo of an extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens with isofocal design

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to compare optical quality results obtained in laboratory analysis (in vitro) versus clinical data (in vivo).

METHODS

The optical quality of ISOPure intraocular lens was assessed both in vitro and in vivo using the modulation transfer function (MTF) for 3.0 and 4.5 mm pupil diameters. In vitro measurements were obtained using deflectometer NIMO TRF1504, while in vivo measurements were taken with OPD-Scan III in a set of patients implanted with this lens. Ray tracing techniques were used to determine the MTF and area under MTF curve (MTFa) from the measured wavefront for the isolated lens and for the whole eye.

RESULTS

The MTF of the isolated lens obtained under both in vitro and in vivo conditions showed comparable results for both pupil sizes. However, differences were found when comparing the MTF of the whole eye with the lens implanted versus the MTF measured in vitro for 4.5 mm pupil size. Also, the MTFa defocus curve was compared with the defocus curve measured in vivo.

CONCLUSION

The defocus curve from the in vivo study aligns closely with the MTFa of the in vitro model, with a useful defocus range of 0.40D. Thus, it is possible to anticipate the visual results of the implanted isofocal lens by using measurements on an optical bench and conducting optical simulations.

Use of the perceptual point-spread function to assess dysphotopsias

Nowadays many patients are choosing EDOF or multifocal lenses for replacement of natural lens in cataract surgery. This can result in issues such as presence of dysphotopsias, namely halo and glare. In this work, we propose a new perimetry method to describe dysphotopsias in far-field region in a presence of bright, point-like light source. We constructed a custom device and designed measurement procedure for quantitative measurement of dysphotopias in the center of visual field and used it to examine patients with mild cataracts or implanted IOLs. Our approach may help in establishing an objective method to study and compare dysphotopsias.

Clinical and Patient Reported Outcomes of an Optimized Trifocal Intraocular Lens

Background/Objectives: To evaluate the clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) obtained with an optimized version of a previously investigated trifocal IOL. Methods: Prospective non-comparative single-center study enrolling 29 patients (55-71 years) undergoing bilateral cataract surgery with implantation of the trifocal diffractive IOL Liberty 677CMY (Medicontur Medical Engineering Ltd., Zsámbék, Hungary). Visual and refractive outcomes as well as PROMs were evaluated during a 3-month follow-up: measurement of uncorrected and corrected distance (UDVA, CDVA), intermediate (UIVA, DCIVA) and near visual acuities (UNVA, DCNVA), defocus curve, patient satisfaction, photic phenomena perception, spectacle independence, and difficulty in performing some vision-related activities. Results: A total of 100%, 92%, and 80% of patients achieved a postoperative binocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA of 20/25 or better, respectively. Likewise, 100%, 80%, and 84% of patients achieved a postoperative binocular CDVA, DCIVA, and DCNVA of 20/25 or better, respectively. In the defocus curve, all mean visual acuity values were better than 0.15 logMAR for all defocus levels. A total of 95.8%, 95.8%, and 91.7% of patients referred to be satisfied with their distance, intermediate, and near visual vision, respectively. Mean overall Catquest Rasch calibrated score was -3.12 ± 0.98. Most of the patients were spectacle independent: far (95.8%), intermediate (95.8%) or near vision (91.7%). No bothersome or minimal to moderately bothersome halo, starburst, and glare was perceived by 83.3%, 83.4%, and 83.3% of patients, respectively. Conclusions: The trifocal IOL evaluated provides a visual acuity improvement, with high levels of spectacle independence, patient satisfaction, and perceived visual quality associated.

Tolerance to residual astigmatism of an isofocal intraocular lens

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of residual astigmatism on the optical and visual performance of an enhanced-monofocal isofocal intraocular lens (EM Isopure, BVI medical, Belgium) compared to a monofocal one (Micropure, BVI medical, Belgium).

METHODS

Laboratory investigation and prospective, comparative and randomized clinical study. Optical quality was assessed on an optical bench for 2.0, 3.0, and 4.5 mm pupils. The effect of residual astigmatism was investigated from through-focus images recorded with increasing amounts of regular positive astigmatism induced with a deformable mirror. To evaluate the impact of residual astigmatism, 28 eyes of 28 patients were randomly assigned to either group. Residual astigmatism was induced with positive and negative cylinder lenses at 90 and 180°. Visual acuity (VA) was measured at each step.

RESULTS

The optical performance of both IOLs was quite similar for 2.0 and 3.0 mm pupils. For 4.5-mm pupil, the EM Isopure showed a significant reduction of its optical quality in comparison with the monofocal IOL. When visual performance was evaluated, no statistically significant differences were found for any power of induced astigmatism. More differences were found when positive induced astigmatism was compared within each group, and VA was better when the astigmatism was induced at 180° vs. 90°. The greatest differences were found for and induced positive astigmatism of + 1.50D (p = 0.009 for Isopure and p = 0.023 for Micropure).

CONCLUSIONS

The tolerance to residual astigmatism of the EM Isopure lens is similar to that of a reference monofocal lens with pupils up to 3.5 mm.

Characterizing glare effects associated with diffractive optics in presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses

PURPOSE

To objectively quantify glare of intraocular lenses (IOLs) using a diffractive principle to extend the visual range and to identify models with increased susceptibility to inducing glare.

SETTING

David J Apple Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany.

DESIGN

Laboratory investigation.

METHODS

Glare was assessed by means of a straylight parameter with a standard C-Quant intended for 7 degrees. In addition, 2 C-Quant modifications were used to test lower angles (ie, 2.5 degrees and 3.5 degrees). The following IOL models were assessed: PanOptix, AT Lisa Tri, Synergy, and Triumf, the latter 2 with chromatic aberration correction at distance. Straylight from trifocal IOLs was compared against a monofocal W-60R lens. The C-Quant test was performed through the studied IOLs by using additional optical components attached to their ocular.

RESULTS

Straylight (deg 2 sr -1 ) of the control was <1 at all tested angles, with the trifocal models showing comparable straylight at 7 degrees. At 3.5 degrees, Triumf's straylight increased to 15.5 ± 0.6, followed by Synergy (6.2 ± 1.1), PanOptix (4.1 ± 0.3), and AT Lisa Tri (2.0 ± 0.8). The chromatic aberration-correcting models demonstrated correspondingly higher straylight (Synergy: 18.8 ± 1.3; Triumf: 17.3 ± 0.5) at 2.5 degrees compared with PanOptix (4.3 ± 0.4), AT Lisa Tri (2.1 ± 0.1), and monofocal IOLs yielding minimal or no increase.

CONCLUSIONS

Trifocal IOLs induced increased straylight, but it was limited to lower angles, which may cause difficulties detecting these effects using a standard clinical approach. The latest IOL designs featuring chromatic aberration correction at far focus seem more susceptible than the established trifocal IOLs to inducing a glare phenomenon.

Optical-Quality Analysis and Defocus-Curve Simulations of a Novel Hydrophobic Trifocal Intraocular Lens

Purpose

The optical function of a novel refractive-diffractive trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) was tested in vitro to provide preclinical metrics that predict postoperative performance and may guide patient selection.

Methods

Fundamental optical characteristics of a trifocal hydrophobic-acrylic IOL with a C-loop haptic configuration (AT ELANA 841P, Carl Zeiss Meditec) were assessed using a fully automated optical test device under both monochromatic and polychromatic conditions combined with increased or compensated spherical aberration (SA). The area under the modulation transfer function (MTFa) was calculated across a defocus range from +1D to -3.5D and used to simulate visual acuity (VA). A polychromatic point spread function (PSF) was employed to assess the light distribution and identify photic phenomena.

Results

The highest MTFa values were obtained under monochromatic conditions using an SA-neutral corneal model. Nevertheless, after introducing SA and polychromatic light, the IOL performance remained good. Simulated VA values were 0.00 logMAR for distance, 0.1 logMAR at 100 cm, and progressively improving to 0.05 logMAR at 40 cm from the intermediate point. The light-spread analysis confirmed halos around the PSF center, which is a characteristic of trifocal technology.

Conclusion

AT ELANA 841P demonstrated good optical performance across various distances, independently of spectral and SA conditions, resulting in good simulated VA. Although light spread resembles standard trifocal IOLs, clinical studies are essential to confirm these laboratory results.

Vehicle Headlight Halo Simulation of Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses

Purpose

This optical bench study was designed to evaluate and compare the halos generated by presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (PCIOLs) and monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs), with or without lens decentration, using an optical bench to simulate the headlight of a distant vehicle in mesopic conditions.

Methods

Halos generated by six nondiffractive and 10 diffractive IOLs with different dioptric add powers were evaluated using a high dynamic range bench system. Halo intensities were compared by assessing the area under the measured intensity profile curve to compute the relative halo magnitude (RHM).

Results

Nondiffractive PCIOLs produced smaller and less intense bench halo images than diffractive ones. RHM measurements ranged from 964 to 1896. Monofocal IOLs produced lower RHM values, whereas diffractive PCIOLs generated higher ones. When decentered by 0.5 mm with respect to the system aperture, more obviously asymmetric halo image profiles were observed in diffractive compared with nondiffractive PCIOLs.

Conclusions

Simulated bench halos of nondiffractive PCIOLs are smaller and less intense than those of diffractive PCIOLs. Additional clinical studies assessing standardized patient-reported outcomes measures are required to correlate these bench results with patient satisfaction.

Translational Relevance

This study contrasts the design-related simulated bench halos of nondiffractive and diffractive PCIOLs, aiming to elucidate their impact on halo perception.

Influence of a multifocal intraocular lens centration and eye angles on light distortion and ocular scatter index

PURPOSE

To assess how eye axes and multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) centration may impact the light distortion index (LDI) and ocular scatter index (OSI).

METHODS

Fifty-eight subjects implanted with the trifocal MIOL Q-Flex M 640PM or Liberty 677MY (Medicontur) were included in this retrospective analysis. The following variables were collected with the Pentacam Wave (Oculus) considering the vertex normal as the coordinates center: chord-mu to the center of the pupil, chord-alpha to the geometrical center of the cornea, and chord-MIOL to the center of the diffractive ring. These measurements were correlated with OSI (HD Analyzer, Visiometrics) and LDI (light distortion analyzer, CEORLab).

RESULTS

Chord-MIOL centroid was 0.12 mm at 62°, chord-mu was 0.09 mm at 174°, and chord-alpha was 0.38 mm at 188°. A relationship was found between OSI and LDI, rho = 0.58, p < 0.0005). No relationships were found between chord-mu or chord-alpha and the LDI or OSI, neither for the total magnitude, nor the decomposition in orthogonal components (p > 0.05). The LDI was significantly correlated with the temporal centration of the MIOL versus the vertex normal (rho = 0.32, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

As opposed to what has been previously described, the temporal centration of the MIOL was related to a decrease in the LDI. Future studies with extreme values of the included variables are required to establish cut-offs for considering these variables as exclusion criteria in the implantation of a MIOL.

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.].

Complementary system vs conventional trifocal intraocular lens: comparison of optical quality metrics and unwanted light distribution

PURPOSE

To evaluate the ARTIS Symbiose complementary intraocular lens (IOL) system, consisting of the MID and PLUS models, in comparison with a conventional trifocal IOL (AcrySof IQ PanOptix).

SETTING

The David J. Apple Center for Vision Research, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

DESIGN

Laboratory investigation.

METHODS

Modulation and phase transfer functions were obtained in polychromatic light using an optical bench setup. Simulated visual acuity (VA) values were derived from optical quality metrics weighted by neural contrast sensitivity. United States Air Force (USAF) chart images were acquired and processed. Furthermore, the light distribution beyond the center of a polychromatic point spread function was assessed.

RESULTS

The peak simulated VA values of ARTIS Symbiose MID were at 0 diopters (D) of defocus (-0.02 logMAR) and at -1.5 D (0.00 logMAR); of ARTIS Symbiose PLUS, they were at 0 D of defocus (-0.01 logMAR) and at -2.5 D (0.01 logMAR). AcrySof IQ PanOptix demonstrated 3 peaks: at 0 D of defocus (-0.02 logMAR), at -1.75 D (0.03 logMAR), and at -2.5 D (0.02 logMAR). The summation of USAF chart images in the simulated binocular IOL system produced a slightly better image quality at -1.0 D and -1.5 D than AcrySof IQ PanOptix. The IOLs yielded comparable light spread across the studied range except for a localized intensity spike of the ARTIS Symbiose IOLs.

CONCLUSIONS

The complementary IOL system may yield better monocular intermediate VA compared with the conventional trifocal IOL. However, the effect of binocular summation in terms of VA and the perception of photic phenomena still needs to be investigated.

Visual performance and impact of residual refractive errors with trifocal intraocular lenses of different aspheric design

BACKGROUND

To assess the visual quality and the tolerance to low refractive errors of two trifocal intraocular lenses (IOL) with different amounts of spherical aberration (SA).

METHODS

The study included patients having bilateral implantation of the AcrySof® IQ PanOptixTM (aberration-correcting) or the RayOneTM (aberration-free) Trifocal IOL. Three months after the surgery patients underwent: monocular/binocular and uncorrected/corrected distance visual acuity (VA) and binocular defocus curves. Binocular contrast sensitivity (CSF) and subjective halo perception were assessed with the best distance correction (CDVA), with a positive defocus of + 0.50D and with a negative defocus of -0.50D. Patient's satisfaction was evaluated with the Catquest9-SF questionnaire.

RESULTS

This study included 54 eyes (28 with PanOptix and 26 with RayOne) of 27 patients. Both groups achieved corrected/uncorrected and monocular/binocular distance VA values better than 0.0 logMAR (1.0 decimal) with no statistically significant differences between them (p > 0.05 for all cases). Defocus curves showed a VA of 0.1 logMAR or better between -2.5 and + 1.0D with no differences between groups (p > 0.05 at all distances). Overall CSF values remained stable under the induced residual refractions for both groups. The halo effect remained stable for the PanOptix group but increased with myopization in the RayOne group (p = 0.02). The questionnaire showed high rates of patient's satisfaction with no differences between groups.

CONCLUSION

Both lenses showed overall good visual outcomes and offered high rates of patient's satisfaction. Moreover, in normal patients with trifocal IOLs, the combination of residual refractive errors and certain amounts of SA may increase some visual disturbances.

Light scattering from a diffractive-refractive intraocular lens: a goniometer-based approach for individual zone assessment

We proposed and tested a method to measure light scattering from the diffractive lens profile in an echelle element featuring 9 zones. Measurements were performed using a goniometer-based setup up to 7.5°. The proportion of scattered light was calculated to derive the loss of light. Material scattering was minimal (∼1 deg2/sr); however, each echelle zone acted as a scattering source. A nearly gradual straylight increase was found with the zone number showing peak intensity between 3° and 3.75°. An estimated 6.2% ± 0.1% was lost due to scattering, which ought to be considered when reporting an IOL's light loss.

Visualization of Ray Propagation through Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lenses

Extended depth-of-focus (EDoF) presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL) models differ in their optical design and performance. In the laboratory, we compared the ray propagation and light intensity profiles of four IOLs: the non-diffractive AcrySof IQ Vivity (Alcon Inc., Fort Worth, TX, USA) and two diffractive models, Symfony ZXR00 (Johnson & Johnson Vision, Jacksonville, FL, USA) and AT Lara 829 MP (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Berlin, Germany). A fourth lens, the monofocal AcrySof IQ SN60WF (Alcon Inc.) acted as the control. We projected a 520 nm laser light through each submerged lens in a bath of fluorescein solution. A camera mounted on a microscope captured the light that emerged from the IOL. We recorded the IOLs' point spread function (PSF) to determine the presence of unwanted visual effects. The ray propagation visualization and light intensity profile of the monofocal control showed one distinct focus, while the AcrySof IQ Vivity demonstrated an extended focus area. We observed two distinct foci with each diffractive IOL. We found a lower level of light spread beyond the PSF center for the AcrySof IQ Vivity compared to the diffractive IOLs. In conclusion, we could confirm the extended range of focus for all the EDoF IOL models. However, the non-diffractive AcrySof IQ Vivity appears to have a smoother transition from a far to an intermediate range. We discuss whether, in clinical use, the higher level of spurious light we found in the diffractive designs may translate into increased dysphotopsia.

Opto-Mechanical Eye Models, a Review on Human Vision Applications and Perspectives for Use in Industry

The purpose of this review is to aggregate technical information on existent optomechanical eye models (OME) described in the literature, for image quality assessment in different applications. Several physical eye models have been reviewed from peer-reviewed papers and patent applications. A typical eye model includes an artificial cornea, an intraocular lens or other lens to simulate the crystalline lens, an aperture as the pupil, and a posterior retinal surface, which may be connected to a light sensor. The interior of the eye model may be filled with a fluid to better emulate physiological conditions. The main focus of this review is the materials and physical characteristics used and the dimensional aspects of the main components including lenses, apertures, chambers, imaging sensors and filling medium. Various devices are described with their applications and technical details, which are systematically tabulated highlighting their main characteristics and applications. The models presented are detailed and discussed individually, and the features of different models are compared when applicable, highlighting strengths and limitations. In the end there is a brief discussion about the potential use of artificial eye models for industrial applications.

Laboratory Evaluation of Halos and Through-Focus Performance of Three Different Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

PURPOSE

To compare the halo features and through-focus performance of three different multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs) that provide distance, intermediate, and near vision in a clinical trial.

METHODS

A trifocal diffractive MIOL (AT LISA tri 839MP; Carl Zeiss Meditec), a diffractive extended depth-of-focus MIOL (TECNIS Symfony ZXR00; Abbott Laboratories, Inc), and a rotational asymmetric refractive MIOL (SBL-3; Lenstec, Inc) were assessed in a modified International Organization for Standardization eye model. The modulation transfer function (MTF) at the IOLs' foci was obtained using aperture sizes of 3 and 4.5 mm. Through-focus MTF curves were compared among all MIOLs. Images of the slit pattern were used to assess halo formation and characteristics.

RESULTS

The AT LISA tri and Symfony IOLs showed symmetric halos. The halos of the AT LISA tri IOL were larger but weaker in distance and near foci, whereas the halos of the Symfony IOL were smaller and fainter in intermediate focus. The halos of the SBL-3 IOL were asymmetric and appeared as tangentially downward weaker halos. The optical performance of diffractive MIOLs gradually deteriorated as the aperture increased. The distance foci of the AT LISA tri and SBL-3 IOLs were of similar superior optical quality, the intermediate focus of the Symfony IOL showed the best optical quality, and the near focus of the SBL-3 IOL outperformed the near foci of the remaining IOLs.

CONCLUSIONS

The differences in the design of the MIOLs translate to differences in optical performance at their foci, through-focus expressions, and halo features, which can provide further information to surgeons when selecting what IOL to implant. [J Refract Surg. 2022;38(9):552-558.].

Optical and Clinical Outcomes of an Extended Range of Vision Intraocular Lens

PURPOSE

To assess the in vitro optical quality and halo formation of the AcrySof IQ Vivity intraocular lens (IOL) (Alcon Laboratories, Inc) and to evaluate the clinical outcomes in patients who had bilateral implantation of this IOL.

METHODS

The optical quality was evaluated with the PMTF optical bench (Lambda-X). Through-focus modulation transfer function area (MTFa) curves between -5.00 and +2.00 diopters (D) were obtained for 3- and 4.5-mm pupil apertures. The halo was assessed in vitro with a test bench. The clinical study included 30 patients. Uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuity and binocular defocus curve were evaluated 6 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

The through-focus MTFa curve for the 4.5-mm pupil size showed only one peak at distance focus (38.4 units). For the 3-mm pupil size, the through-focus MTFa showed a lower peak of MTFa (28.9 units), located at -0.70 D, and an extended depth of focus up to -2.20 D. The halo formed was larger and more intense compared to a standard monofocal IOL. The clinical outcomes at 6 months revealed satisfactory visual acuity outcomes. All patients achieved a binocular CDVA of 0.1 logMAR or better. The mean visual acuity was better than 0.2 logMAR between +1.00 and -2.00 D of defocus. At a vergence of -2.50 D, the visual acuity was 0.31 ± 0.09 logMAR.

CONCLUSIONS

The AcrySof IQ Vivity IOL provided good distance optical and visual quality and an extended range of focus of approximately 2.00 D, obtaining an optimal or functional visual acuity up to 50 to 40 cm. The halo formed was low intensity overall, but higher intensity than a monofocal IOL. [J Refract Surg. 2022;38(3):168-176.].

Polychromatic Assessment of a Refractive Segmented EDOF Intraocular Lens

This study aimed to evaluate in vitro performance refractive segmented EDOF intraocular lenses under polychromatic light using an optical bench that complies with the ISO 11979-2 Norm. The through focus modulation transfer function (TF-MTF) of the Femtis Comfort LS-313 MF15 (Oculentis GmbH, Berlin, Germany) IOL was evaluated for IOLs with three different base powers. The effect of the asymmetry of the segmented designs was evaluated with 3 different wavelengths and with polychromatic light at a 3.0 mm and 5.0 mm pupil diameter. It was demonstrated that the TF-MTF curves exhibit a bifocal profile that, in practice, results in an EDOF design. As a consequence of the LCA, the TF-MTF values in white light were lower than in monochromatic light. Images of the USAF test chart were obtained to confirm the prediction of the TF-MTFs. We found that Femtis Comfort is a bifocal low-addition IOL and this fact can result in an EDOF effect which was obtained previously in clinical trials. Moreover, we showed that the base power influences the IOL optical quality, which results as more effective for high powers (hyperopic eyes) than for low powers (myopic eyes). The LCA of the segmented refractive design was very low and presumably not clinically relevant.

Development of a novel multifocal lens using a polarization directed flat lens: possible candidate for a multifocal intraocular lens

BACKGROUND

A polarization-directed flat (PDF) lens acts as a converging lens with a focal length (f) > 0 and a diverging lens with f < 0, depending on the polarization state of the incidental light. To produce a multifocal lens with two focal lengths, a PDF and a converging lens having shorter focal length were combined. In this study, we tested a bifocal PDF to determine its potential as a new multifocal intraocular lens (IOL).

METHODS

Constructed a multifocal lens with a PDF lens (f = +/- 100 mm) and a converging lens (f = + 25 mm). In an optical bench test, we measured the defocus curve to test the multifocal function. The multifocal function and optical quality of the lens in various situations were tested. An Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart as a near target and a building as a distant target were photographed using a digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) camera. Both lenses (multifocal and monofocal) were tested under the same conditions.

RESULTS

For the 0 D and - 20 D focal points, the multifocal lens showed sharp images in the optical bench test. In the DSLR test using the multifocal lens, the building appeared slightly blurry compared with the results using the monofocal lens. With the multifocal lens, the ETDRS chart's images became blurry as the ETDRS chart's distance decreased, but became very clear again at a certain position.

CONCLUSIONS

We confirmed the multifocal function of the multifocal lens using a PDF lens. This lens can be used as a multifocal IOL in the future.

The Effect of Age, Postoperative Refraction, and Pre- and Postoperative Pupil Size on Halo Size and Intensity in Eyes Implanted with a Trifocal or Extended Depth-of-Focus Lens

Purpose

Halos are a chief source of patient dissatisfaction after multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of age, postoperative refraction, and pre- and postoperative pupil size on postoperative halo size with a trifocal diffractive IOL (AcrySof IQ PanOptix) and extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) IOL (TECNIS Symfony) to determine whether these factors could predict postoperative halo size.

Patients and Methods

This single-center, open-label study conducted between October 2018 and April 2020 in Yokosuka, Japan included 160 patients: 80 with PanOptix and 80 with Symfony IOLs. Size and intensity of the halos were examined binocularly using a computer-based simulator (Eyeland Design Network GmbH) and scored from 0 (minimum) to 10 (maximum) at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively, along with the change in each variable for both IOLs. The respective correlations of halo size with age, postoperative refraction, pre- and postoperative pupil size, and discomfort level due to the halo were also investigated 6 months postoperatively.

Results

Halo size and intensity were significantly mitigated between 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. Throughout the observation period, halo size was significantly larger with PanOptix than with Symphony (P < 0.05), and halo intensity was significantly higher with Symphony than with PanOptix (P < 0.05). The pre- and postoperative pupil size correlated positively with halo size, while age and postoperative refraction were negatively correlated, for both IOLs.

Conclusion

Understanding the features and predictive preoperative factors of halos in different types of multifocal IOLs may be useful in improving patient satisfaction.

Laboratory Investigation of Preclinical Visual-Quality Metrics and Halo-Size in Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lenses

Introduction

This study aims to compare preclinical visual-quality metrics and halo size of intraocular lenses (IOL) with enhanced intermediate vision to a standard monofocal lens.

Methods

Three monofocal- IOL models with an extended-depth-of-focus (EDoF) intended for monocular implantation (Tecnis ICB00, AE2UV/ZOE, and IsoPure) and one for monovision (RayOne EMV) were compared against a standard monofocal lens (Tecnis ZCB00). An optical-metrology station was used in the assessment of IOLs' optical quality in polychromatic light. The imaging quality was compared with metrics derived from the optical transfer function. Halo size was estimated from the projection of the point spread function under scotopic pupil.

Results

The monofocal IOL showed the highest image quality at the far focus. The ICB00’s, the AE2UV/ZOE’s, and the IsoPure’s performance at − 1D was superior to that of the monofocal lens. The monocular defocus tolerance of the RayOne EMV was comparable with that of the ZCB00. The RayOne EMV’s intermediate range was improved in a monovision configuration (− 1D offset). This approach, however, yielded the largest halo area, i.e., 53% of the ZCB00’s halo, compared to 34% for the IsoPure, 14% for the AE2UV/ZOE, and 8% for the ICB00.

Conclusion

The mono-EDoF models have a clear advantage over the standard monofocal lens by expanded imaging capability beyond − 0.5D. Although the RayOne EMV provided the largest (binocular) visual-range extension, it was at the expense of monocular vision and higher susceptibility to halo. The ICB00’s and the AE2UV/ZOE’s halo-profile was similar to that of the ZCB00, indicating their low potential to induce photic phenomena.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40123-021-00411-9.

Impact of residual astigmatism and defocus in eyes with trifocal intraocular lenses

PURPOSE

To assess the impact on visual function of different residual astigmatic situations combined with 0.50D negative defocus at different distances in patients with trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs).

SETTING

Clínica Rementería, Madrid, Spain.

DESIGN

Prospective case series.

METHODS

The study included patients with the AcrySof® IQ PanOptixTM IOL. Visual acuity (VA) was measured at far distance (0.00 diopters [D] of vergence), at -1.5D, -2.5D and -3.0D of vergence. Residual astigmatism was induced by adding 0.50 and 1.00D cylindrical lenses placed at 90° (against the rule - ATR), 45° (oblique) and 180° (with the rule - WTR). All measurements were made with distance correction (emmetropia as the reference situation) and with a simulated residual myopia of 0.50D.

RESULTS

The study included 61 eyes of 61 patients. Residual astigmatism of 0.50D and 1.0D was induced in 28 and 33 eyes, respectively. For both groups distance and intermediate VA was better for the reference situation (P<0.001 for all cases). With 1.0D of cylinder (without and with induced defocus), the proportion of patients who lost ≥2 lines was higher for the ATR astigmatism. For near vision, differences were smaller for all simulated situations.

CONCLUSION

Residual astigmatism of up to 0.50D, regardless of its orientation, seems to be tolerated at all distances. For astigmatisms of 1.0D, distance and intermediate VA decreased significantly, and ATR orientations showed worse results in a higher proportion of patients. The combination of astigmatism with residual myopia significantly decreased distance VA while this negative shift had less impact on near VA.

Optical Performance of a Monofocal Intraocular Lens Designed to Extend Depth of Focus

PURPOSE

To test the performance of a new monofocal intraocular lens, intended to extend depth of focus (Tecnis Eyhance, ICB00; Johnson & Johnson Vision, Inc) (ICB-IOL), in comparison to a standard monofocal IOL (Tecnis 1-piece, ZCB00; Johnson & Johnson Vision, Inc) (ZCB-IOL) of the same platform and material.

METHODS

Assessment of the optical performance of the two IOLs was made in vitro using an optical test bench with a model eye. The spherical aberration, modulation transfer function (MTF), and area under the MTF (MTFa) were obtained for pupil sizes ranging from 2 to 5 mm. Through-focus MTFa curves between -3.00 and +1.00 diopters (D) were obtained with three pupil sizes (2, 3, and 4.5 mm). Halo formation was also assessed for both lenses.

RESULTS

The ICB-IOL had slightly worse optical quality at its best focus (ie, lower MTF scores at distance vision) and more negative spherical aberration than the ZCB-IOL for pupils ranging from 2 to 3 mm. The maximum of the through-focus MTFa curve of the ICB-IOL with a 2-mm pupil shifted to a myopic defocus of -0.50 D. For larger pupils (≥ 3.5 mm), there were no differences in spherical aberration, MTF scores, and halo energy between the two lenses.

CONCLUSIONS

The new ICB-IOL is a modified monofocal lens with 0.50 D of additional power in its central 2-mm zone and more negative spherical aberration values, which induce a myopic shift of the maximum of optical quality and could improve intermediate vision. For pupils larger than 3.5 mm, there were no differences between IOLs. The new ICB-IOL design would produce photic phenomena comparable to a standard IOL. [J Refract Surg. 2020;36(9):625-632.].

Visual performance and patient satisfaction after implantation of extended range-of-vision IOLs: bilateral implantation vs 2 different mix-and-match approaches

PURPOSE

To compare the visual outcomes and patient satisfaction after bilateral implantation of an extended range-of-vision intraocular lens (ERoV IOL) (Tecnis Symfony) vs 2 different mix-and-match approaches combining the ERoV IOL with bifocal IOLs.

SETTING

Glory Seoul Eye Clinic, Seoul, South Korea.

DESIGN

Prospective observational nonrandomized comparative study.

METHODS

Patients undergoing cataract surgery were distributed into 3 groups based on their lifestyle and near visual demands: bilateral Symfony IOL, mix-and-match Symfony IOL with bifocal +3.25 diopters (D) IOL, and Symfony IOL with bifocal +4.0 D IOL. Binocular uncorrected visual acuity for distance, intermediate, and near, manifest refraction, defocus curve, contrast sensitivity, and subjective visual perception and satisfaction (photic phenomena, spectacle independence, and patient satisfaction) were evaluated at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

The study comprised 103 people (206 eyes). There were no significant differences for uncorrected visual acuity between groups for distance, intermediate, and near vision (P > .05). Contrast sensitivity under low and high luminance conditions was not different between groups (P > .05). Influence of glare on image perception was found to reduce contrast sensitivity more in the bilateral group for smaller target sizes (P < .05). Patients implanted bilaterally with Symfony IOLs reported photic phenomena more frequently than those implanted with the mix-and-match combinations.

CONCLUSIONS

All combinations evaluated provided good visual outcomes for distance, intermediate, and near. The lower incidence of photic phenomena reported by patients, and the lower reduction on contrast sensitivity for low illumination levels with the presence of glare, suggest that mix-and-match approaches might be a better option compared with bilateral implantation of ERoV IOLs.

Visual function and subjective perception of vision after bilateral implantation of monofocal and multifocal IOLs: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

To examine monocular and binocular visual function and patient-reported outcomes after implantation of multifocal IOLs (mIOLs) or monofocal IOLs, using a rigorous series of clinical assessments.

SETTING

BMI Southend Hospital, United Kingdom.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, double-masked clinical trial.

METHODS

One hundred patients were randomized for bilateral implantation of either a Bi-Flex 677MY mIOL or a Bi-Flex 677AB IOL and were assessed at 3 to 6 months (V1) and 12 to 18 months (V2). Primary outcomes included distance, intermediate, and near logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuities (VAs) and defocus curve profile assessment. Secondary outcomes included reading speed, contrast sensitivity (CS), and the subjective perception of quality of vision.

RESULTS

Forty-seven subjects with monofocal IOL and 43 mIOL subjects completed the study. Uncorrected (mIOL: 0.10 ± 0.09 logMAR; IOL: 0.09 ± 0.11 logMAR) and corrected (mIOL: 0.04 ± 0.06 logMAR; IOL: 0.01 ± 0.07 logMAR) distance VAs were comparable (P > .05). Uncorrected near VA (mIOL: 0.23 ± 0.13 logMAR; IOL: 0.55 ± 0.20 logMAR, P < .001) and distance-corrected near VA (mIOL: 0.24 ± 0.13 logMAR; IOL: 0.54 ± 0.17 logMAR, P < .001) were significantly improved with mIOLs. There was no significant difference in distance-corrected intermediate VA (mIOL: 0.38 ± 0.13 logMAR; IOL: 0.39 ± 0.13 logMAR, P = .431). Defocus curves demonstrated an increased range-of-focus among mIOLs (mIOL: 4.14 ± 1.10 diopter [D]; IOL: 2.57 ± 0.77 D). Pelli-Robson CS was different at V1 (P < .001) but similar by V2 (P = .059). Overall satisfaction was high (>90%) in both groups for distance tasks whereas significantly different for near tasks (mIOL, 18.45 ± 16.53 logUnits; IOL, 55.59 ± 22.52 logUnits).

CONCLUSIONS

Uncorrected near visual acuity was demonstrably better with mIOLs and there was greater subjective satisfaction with quality of near vision. Halos reported by the mIOL group were significant compared with the IOL group but did not show an adverse effect on overall satisfaction.

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.

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 the intermediate distance of a trifocal IOL with an extended depth-of-focus IOL: results of a prospective randomized trial

PURPOSE

To compare visual outcomes, reading ability, and visual quality between the Symfony extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens (IOL) and the trifocal AT LISA tri 839MP IOL.

SETTING

University Eye Clinic Maastricht, The Netherlands.

DESIGN

Prospective randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to bilateral Symfony IOL or AT LISA tri 839MP IOL implantation. The primary outcome measure was uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA measured at 66 cm). Secondary outcomes included uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), reading ability, and comparison of defocus curves, contrast sensitivity, optical adverse effects, and quality of vision.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 60 eyes of 30 patients. The mean UIVA was -0.02 ± 0.03 (SD) vs 0.01 ± 0.03 logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution (logMAR) in the Symfony and AT LISA tri 839MP groups, respectively (P = .047). The UDVA was 0.01 ± 0.12 and -0.05 ± 0.07 logMAR (P = .11) and the UNVA was 0.09 ± 0.05 and 0.04 ± 0.07 logMAR (P = .052) in the Symfony and AT LISA tri 839MP groups, respectively. Reading ability was similar in both groups at 40 cm and 66 cm (P = .87 and P = .14, respectively). Less than 10% of patients in both groups experienced disabling glare. Patients experienced disabling halos in the AT LISA tri 839 MP group compared to the Symfony group in 39% and 21% of cases, respectively (P = .12). The mean score for visual functioning was 88.0 ± 14.1 n the trifocal group and 88.2 ± 10.9 for the EDOF group (P = .96).

CONCLUSIONS

The UIVA was better in the Symfony group than in the AT LISA tri 839MP group. No significant differences were seen in the binocular UNVA and UDVA, contrast sensitivity, reading ability, incidence of photopic phenomena, and patient satisfaction.

Measures of visual disturbance in patients receiving extended depth-of-focus or trifocal intraocular lenses

The degree of visual disturbance associated with a particular model of intraocular lens (IOL) depends on several factors, including IOL optic, material, and mechanics. Characterization of visual disturbance profiles is paramount for informing clinical IOL selection. Although many studies evaluating presbyopia-correcting IOLs include subjective assessment of visual symptoms, the types of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to capture these outcomes are inconsistent across studies, complicating data contextualization. Furthermore, some tools produce more meaningful results than others. This review presents a discussion on the scientific literature published on the subjective and semiobjective (halo and glare simulator, light-distortion analyzer, vision monitor, and halometers) methods used to assess visual disturbances in patients implanted with trifocal or extended depth-of-focus IOLs, highlighting their advantages and limitations. It underscores the importance of between-study comparisons and the need for standardized PROMs in clinical IOL research to provide more accurate information for IOL selection.

Equivalence of two optical quality metrics to predict the visual acuity of multifocal pseudophakic patients

This article studies the relationship between two metrics, the area under the modulation transfer function (MTFa) and the energy efficiency (EE), and their ability to predict the visual quality of patients implanted with multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). The optical quality of IOLs is assessed in vitro using two metrics, the MTFa and EE. We measured them for three different multifocal IOLs with parabolic phase profile using image formation, through-focus (TF) scanning, three R, G, B wavelengths, and two pupils. We analyzed the correlation between MTFa and EE. In parallel, clinical defocus curves of visual acuity (VA) were measured and averaged from sets of patients implanted with the same IOLs. An excellent linear correlation was found between the MTFa and EE for the considered IOLs, wavelengths and pupils (R² > 0.9). We computed the polychromatic TF-MTFa, TF-EE, and derived mathematical relationships between each metrics and clinical average VA. MTFa and EE proved to be equivalent metrics to characterize the optical quality of the studied multifocal IOLs and also in terms of clinical VA predictability.

Optical evaluation of new-design multifocal IOLs with extended depth of focus

In this study, we investigate in vitro the optical performance of new-design extended depth of focus (EDOF) complementary intraocular lenses (IOLs) (ACTIVE, Cristalens Industrie, France), compared with traditional bifocal ones. Evaluation of their optical quality was achieved by measuring the point spread function at multiple distances (through focus) using an optical bench. In addition, the modulation transfer function through focus was calculated, correlating our results with actual visual outcomes. Our results may suggest that these new EDOF IOLs, when implanted together, could possibly better control multifocality, offering an increased DOF at all distances.

From Presbyopia to Cataracts: A Critical Review on Dysfunctional Lens Syndrome

Dysfunctional lens syndrome (DLS) is a term coined to describe the natural aging changes in the crystalline lens. Different alterations in the refractive properties and transparency of the lens are produced during the development of presbyopia and cataract, such as changes in internal high order aberrations or an increase in ocular forward scattering, with a potentially significant impact on clinical measures, including visual acuity and contrast sensitivity. Objective technologies have emerged to solve the limits of current methods for the grading of the lens aging, which have been linked to the DLS term. However, there is still not a gold standard or evidence-based clinical guidelines around these new technologies despite multiple research studies have correlated their results with conventional methods such as visual acuity or the lens opacification system (LOCS), with more scientific background around the ocular scattering index (OSI) and Scheimpflug densitometry. In either case, DLS is not a new evidence-based concept that leads to new knowledge about crystalline lens aging but it is a nomenclature change of two existing terms, presbyopia and cataracts. Therefore, this term should be used with caution in the scientific peer-reviewed literature.

Through-Focus Vision Performance and Light Disturbances of 3 New Intraocular Lenses for Presbyopia Correction

Purpose

To compare the through-focus visual performance in a clinical population of pseudophakic patients implanted with two new trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and one extended depth of focus IOL.

Methods

Prospective, nonrandomized, examiner-masked case series. Twenty-three patients received the FineVision® and seven patients received the PanOptix™ trifocal IOLs. Fifteen patients received the Symfony extended depth of focus IOL. Mean age of patients was 63 ± 8 years. Through-focus visual acuity was measured from –3.00 to +1.00 D vergences. Contrast sensitivity was measured with and without a source of glare. Light disturbances were evaluated with the Light Distortion Analyzer.

Results

Though-focus evaluation showed that trifocal IOLs performed significantly better at near distance (33 and 40 cm), and extended depth of focus performed significantly better at intermediate distance (1.0 m). Contrast sensitivity function with glare and dysphotopsia was similar between the three IOLs and subjective response to questionnaire showed a significantly higher score (worse performance) for the extended depth of focus IOL compared to both trifocal IOLs in the bothersome subscale (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Trifocal IOLs grant better performance at near distance while extended depth of focus IOL performs better at intermediate distance. Objective dysphotopsia measured with the Light Distortion Analyzer is not reduced in extended depth of focus IOL compared to trifocal IOLs.