COMPARISON OF REFRACTIVE AND VISUAL OUTCOMES OF THREE PRESBYOPIA-CORRECTING INTRAOCULAR LENSES

Functional outcomes after refractive lens exchange with implantation of a glistening-free diffractive trifocal intraocular lens

PURPOSE

To evaluate visual outcomes and patient-reported results after bilateral femtosecond-laser assisted refractive lens exchange (RLE) with the implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens (IOL).

DESIGN

Prospective interventional case series METHODS: A study of 27 patients (54 eyes) implanted with the Clareon PanOptix (Alcon) multifocal IOL during femtosecond laser assisted RLE in a university hospital setting. The uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuity, uncorrected (UIVA) and distance-corrected (DCIVA) intermediate visual acuity at 60cm, uncorrected (UNVA) and distance-corrected (DCNVA) near visual acuity at 40cm and 33cm were evaluated at three months postoperatively and compared with the preoperative values. In addition, we assessed the postoperative defocus curve, mesopic and photopic contrast sensitivity, and patient-reported spectacle independence.

RESULTS

The mean postoperative binocular UDVA was -0.02±0.06 logMAR and CDVA was -0.11±0.05 logMAR. The UIVA was -0.07±0.05 logMAR and DCIVA was -0.07±0.07 logMAR. The UNVA at 40cm was 0.03±0.09 logMAR and DCNVA was -0.02±0.06 logMAR; and, at 33cm UNVA was 0.14±0.10 logMAR and DCNVA was 0.11±0.08 logMAR. In comparison to the preoperative binocular CDVA (-0.12±0.08 logMAR), no statistically significant change was observed (p=1.0), while all the other binocular visual acuities improved (p<0.01). In the mean binocular defocus curve, the visual acuity was better than 0.10 logMAR in the range between +0.5 D and -3.0 D. The mean contrast sensitivity was within the normal range, and most patients reported complete spectacle independence.

CONCLUSION

The RLE surgery improved uncorrected visual acuity at far, intermediate and near distances without negatively affecting the CDVA. Patients achieved a high level of spectacle independence.

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.

Clinical outcomes of a toric continuous range of vision presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of the toric version of a presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL) based on the combination of a diffractive-based extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) pattern and a diffractive multifocal platform.

SETTING

Miranza COI Bilbao, Bilbao, Spain.

DESIGN

Prospective case series.

METHODS

35 patients (51 to 84 years) with corneal astigmatism ranging from 0.75 to 2.19 diopters (D) undergoing bilateral cataract surgery with implantation of the Synergy Toric II IOL were evaluated during a 3-month follow-up. Visual acuity, refraction, defocus curve, and patient-reported outcomes with the Catquest-9SF questionnaire were analyzed. A vectorial analysis was used to analyze the accuracy of astigmatic correction.

RESULTS

Mean 3-month monocular postoperative uncorrected distance, intermediate (80 cm) and near (40 cm) visual acuities were 0.06 ± 0.11 logMAR, 0.13 ± 0.12 logMAR, and 0.13 ± 0.09 logMAR, respectively. Mean monocular distance-corrected intermediate (80 cm) and near visual acuity (40 cm) were 0.11 ± 0.12 logMAR and 0.10 ± 0.10 logMAR, respectively. Mean binocular defocus curve showed visual acuities of 0.10 logMAR or better for defocus levels from +0.50 to -2.50 D. Residual cylinder was within ±0.50 D in 97.0% of eyes. The surgically induced astigmatism prediction error ranged between -0.49 D and 0.50 D, with a mean value of 0.04 ± 0.16 D. Mean absolute IOL rotation was 3.79 ± 2.94 degrees. Significant improvements were found in all Rasch-calibrated scores obtained with Catquest-9SF ( P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The implantation of the toric presbyopia-correcting IOL evaluated provides an efficacious astigmatic correction while providing a fully restoration of the visual function across different distances.

Clinical performance after implantation of an EDOF intraocular lens in the dominant eye and a presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens in the nondominant eye

PURPOSE

To evaluate subjective and objective outcomes after combined implantation of an extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) and a combined technology multifocal lens (CT-IOL).

SETTING

2 clinical practices (Carolina Eyecare Physicians, Center For Sight) in the United States.

DESIGN

Prospective, unmasked, multicenter, nonrandomized bilateral eye study.

METHODS

Patients interested in reducing their dependence on spectacles were implanted with an EDOF IOL in the dominant eye and a CT-IOL in the nondominant eye. Refractive and visual acuity (VA) data at various distances (4 m, 66 cm, 40 cm, and 33 cm) were collected 3 months postsurgery, along with the distance-corrected binocular defocus curve and responses to questionnaires related to spectacle independence, visual disturbances, and overall visual function.

RESULTS

Data from 37 participants were analyzed. The distance-corrected binocular defocus curve showed a mean VA better than 0.1 logMAR (20/25) at all vergences from +1.00 to -2.50 diopters (D). 36 participants (97%) had an uncorrected binocular VA of 0.3 logMAR or better, at all test distances. 70% of participants (26/37) reported never wearing spectacles at any distance, and 84% (31/37) were "completely" or "mostly" satisfied with their overall vision after surgery. Halos were the disturbance reported most frequently and reported as most bothersome, with difficulty driving at night the most common visual function issue. Difficulty reading was the next most reported issue. Overall eyesight was rated as "excellent" or "good" by 92% (34/37) of participants.

CONCLUSIONS

This combined EDOF/CT-IOL approach was well-tolerated by participants and provided some potential benefits relative to bilateral implantation of either lens.

Comparative efficacy and safety of all kinds of intraocular lenses in presbyopia-correcting cataract surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy and safety of various intraocular lenses (IOLs), including standard monofocal, bifocal, trifocal, extended depth of focus (EDOF), and enhanced monofocal IOLs, post-cataract surgery through a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted to identify relevant studies from the past 5 years. Parameters such as binocular visual acuities, spectacle independence, contrast sensitivity (CS), and optical quality were used to evaluate efficacy and safety. Data from the selected studies were analyzed using Review Manager 5.4 and STATA 17.0 software.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comprising 2465 subjects were included. Trifocal IOLs exhibited superior uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) compared to monofocal IOLs (MD: -0.35; 95% CI: -0.48, -0.22). Both trifocal (AcrySof IQ PanOptix IOLs group MD: -0.13; 95% CI: -0.21, -0.06) and EDOF IOLs (MD: -0.13; 95% CI: -0.17, -0.09) showed better uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) than monofocal IOLs. Trifocal IOLs ranked highest in spectacle independence at various distances (AT LISAtri 839MP group: SUCRA 97.5% for distance, 80.7% for intermediate; AcrySof IQ PanOptix group: SUCRA 83.0% for near).

CONCLUSIONS

For cataract patients who want to treat presbyopia, trifocal IOLs demonstrated better visual acuity and spectacle independence at near distances. Different types of trifocal IOL characteristics differ. EDOF and enhanced monofocal IOLs have improved visual quality at intermediate distances.Therefore, It is very important to select the appropriate IOLs based on the lens characteristics and patient needs.

Customizing Clinical Outcomes with Implantation of Two Diffractive Trifocal IOLs of Identical Design but Differing Light Distributions to the Far, Intermediate and Near Foci

Purpose

To evaluate clinical outcomes after bilateral or contralateral implantation of the Gemetric™ (G) and Gemetric™ Plus (GPlus) diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs).

Methods

This was a prospective, randomized, multi-center open-label study comparing clinical results and subjective patient responses around 6 months after implantation of the study lenses (toric and non-toric) in three different groups (bilateral G, bilateral GPlus and contralateral G/GPlus implantation). Results included the manifest refraction, uncorrected and distance corrected monocular and binocular visual acuity (VA) at distance, intermediate and near; the defocus curve; contrast sensitivity; and patient reported outcomes regarding spectacle independence, satisfaction and visual disturbances.

Results

There was no statistically significant difference in the mean refraction spherical equivalent between the two lens models (p = 0.33) or between the toric and non-toric lenses (p = 0.06). Monocular VA was better at distance with the G lens and better at near with the GPlus lens (p < 0.01). Mean binocular VA was better than 0.1 logMAR at all distances for all groups, both uncorrected and distance corrected. The mean binocular distance corrected VA was better than 0.15 logMAR from 0.0 D to -3.50 D for all groups. All VA data for the contralateral group was as good or better than for the bilateral GPlus group. Questionnaire results showed no difference between groups for the frequency, severity, or degree of bother of visual disturbances (p > 0.24).

Conclusion

The two diffractive trifocal IOLs studied here may be used either bilaterally or contralaterally for the correction of presbyopia in cataract patients, providing excellent visual acuity with low levels of visual disturbances and high rates of overall spectacle independence. Bilateral Gemetric implantation resulted in slightly better distance and intermediate vision while contralateral implantation provided slightly better near vision. There was no apparent advantage to implanting the GPlus IOL bilaterally.

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.

Comparative Analysis of the Clinical Outcomes of Two Toric Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes of two toric presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs).

METHODS

Non-randomized prospective comparative study including 86 eyes of 51 patients (age 43-83 years) that underwent cataract surgery with implantation of one of the following two IOLs: TECNIS Toric Synergy (Johnson & Johnson Vision) (Synergy group) or AT LISA tri toric 939MP (Carl Zeiss Meditec) (ATLISA group). Visual and refractive outcomes were evaluated during a 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

At 6 months after surgery, all eyes achieved uncorrected distance visual acuity 20/25 or better in both groups, whereas 96.2% and 100% of eyes achieved uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) 20/25 or better in the ATLISA and Synergy groups, respectively. All eyes achieved postoperative mesopic UNVA 20/30 or better in both IOL groups; 96.2% and 100% of eyes had a manifest cylinder ≤ 0.50 D at 6 months in ATLISA and Synergy groups, respectively. Mean magnitude of error was 0.04 ± 0.20 and - 0.04 ± 0.09 D in ATLISA and Synergy groups, respectively (p = 0.05). In the defocus curve, significant differences were found between IOL groups for most of distance-corrected visual acuities, except those corresponding to defocus of 0 D (p = 0.268) and - 1 D (p = 0.361).

CONCLUSIONS

The two toric presbyopia-correcting IOLs evaluated provide an efficacious astigmatic correction combined with a successful distance, intermediate and near visual rehabilitation. The visual performance seems to be better for most visual demands with the TECNIS Toric Synergy IOL, especially for distances closer than 40 cm.

Clinical Outcomes of a Bi-Aspheric Trifocal Diffractive Intraocular Lens

Purpose

To assess refractive and visual outcomes post-cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of a bi-aspheric diffractive trifocal intraocular lens (IOL).

Methods

A total of 24 patients who underwent bilateral implantation with the Asqelio Trifocal IOL TFLIO130C were evaluated at the 6 months postoperative mark. Key outcome measures included refractive error, photopic monocular and binocular uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA, CDVA), uncorrected and corrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA, CDIVA) at 60 cm, and uncorrected and corrected near visual acuity (UNVA, CDNVA) at 40 cm. Additionally, monocular and binocular CDNVA were assessed under mesopic conditions. Monocular and binocular defocus curves, and binocular contrast sensitivity under photopic and mesopic conditions, with and without glare, were measured. Catquest-9SF and visual symptoms questionnaires were also administered.

Results

Postoperative average values of binocular logMAR photopic CDVA, photopic CDIVA, photopic CDNVA and mesopic CDNVA were -0.01±0.06, 0.03±0.09, 0.02±0.05 and 0.19±0.13, respectively. About 100% of patients showed cumulative CDVA and CDNVA ≥20/25, and CDIVA ≥20/32. The average absolute depth-of-focus was about 4.50D. The average postoperative spherical equivalent was 0.05±0.30D and 100% and 93.75% eyes were within ±1.00D and ±0.50D, respectively. Contrast sensitivity was either within or above normal levels under both photopic and mesopic conditions, both with and without glare, except for 12 cpd under mesopic conditions with glare where the mean falls just below the normal range. Questionnaires revealed that 87.5% of patients were either satisfied or very satisfied with their vision after the surgery, and higher percentages for no difficulty in performing different activities, ranging from 70.83% to 95.83%, were reported.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that the bi-aspheric diffractive trifocal IOL yields very good visual performance across distances, fostering high satisfaction levels and minimal difficulties in daily activities.

Clinical outcomes in eyes with diffractive continuous depth-of-focus intraocular lenses enhanced for near vision: comparison with trifocal intraocular lenses

BACKGROUND

To prospectively evaluate visual functions and patient satisfaction after bilateral implantation of diffractive continuous depth-of-focus intraocular lens (CDF IOL) compared with trifocal IOLs.

METHODS

This investigator-initiated study was approved by a certified local review board (registered: jRCTs032210305). CDF IOL (Synergy, J&J, group S) and trifocal IOL (AcrySof PanOptix, Alcon, group P) were implanted bilaterally in 30 patients each. Three months postoperatively, binocular outcomes of uncorrected (BUCVA) and distance-corrected (BDCVA) visual acuities at distances of 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.7, and 5 m were measured. Contrast sensitivities were binocularly measured using CSV-1000 (2.5 m) and Pelli-Robson charts at distances of 0.4 and 1 m. Symptoms of glare, halo, starburst, and waxy vision, and satisfaction for near, intermediate, and far visions were assessed with questionnaires. Differences between the two groups were examined.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients each completed the follow-up. The mean age of the group S was lower than that of the group P (P < 0.001). The BUCVA at 0.4 m was better in the S group, while the mean manifest refraction of the P group showed a significant hyperopic shift (P < 0.001). BDCVA was significantly better in the S group. The contrast sensitivity results at three distances showed no discernible differences. Although more patients in the S group reported significant glare and halo, their satisfaction with near vision was higher.

CONCLUSIONS

The binocular visual function of patients with CDF IOLs was comparable to or better than that of patients with trifocal IOLs. The patients were satisfied with near vision, despite the enhanced glare and halo. Understanding the differences between the two types of presbyopia-correcting IOLs is important to ensure patient satisfaction.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This clinical trial was registered in the Japan Registry for Clinical Research (identifier: jRCTs032210305) on September 13, 2021.

Clinical Performance of a New Trifocal IOL with a 7.0 mm Optical Zone

Purpose

To evaluate the refractive and visual outcomes following cataract surgery and implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) with a 7.0 mm optical zone.

Methods

A total of 23 patients who underwent bilateral implantation with the Triva-aXAY IOL were analyzed at 6 months post-surgery. The main outcome measures were refractive error, monocular and binocular uncorrected and corrected-distance visual acuity (UDVA, CDVA), uncorrected and corrected-distance intermediate visual acuity (UIVA, CDIVA) at 60 cm, uncorrected and corrected-distance near visual acuity (UNVA, CDNVA) at 40 cm, and binocular defocus curve. Patients also completed the Catquest-9SF questionnaire.

Results

All eyes were within ±1.00D, and 91.30% of eyes within ±0.50D, with a mean postoperative spherical equivalent of -0.14±0.29D. Similarly, 95.65% of patients showed a binocular UDVA ≥20/25, compared to 100% for CDVA, and the mean binocular UDVA and CDVA were 0.02±0.06 and 0.00±0.05 logMAR, respectively. At intermediate vision, 65.22% of patients showed a binocular UIVA ≥20/25, compared to 86.96% for CDIVA, and the mean binocular UIVA and CDIVA were 0.07±0.06 and 0.06±0.06 logMAR, respectively. At near, 95.65% of patients showed a binocular UNVA and CDNVA ≥20/25, with a mean binocular UDNVA and CDNVA of 0.04±0.07 and 0.02±0.05 logMAR, respectively. Finally, 95.65% of patients reported being quite satisfied to very satisfied with their vision and about 74% did not report any difficulty with their vision in their everyday life. Between 65.22% and 100% of patients reported no difficulty performing different tasks.

Conclusion

Our study shows good visual and refractive outcomes with high satisfaction in patients implanted with the Triva-aXAY IOL with a 7.0 mm optical zone.

Increasing depth of focus with allogeneic presbyopic inlays: 3-year results

PURPOSE

To demonstrate the safety and efficacy of allogenic corneal inlays designed to increase the depth of focus (DoF) in treated eyes.

SETTINGS

Medipol University Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

DESIGN

Prospective case series.

METHODS

This study includes 50 eyes of 25 patients with a follow-up of 3 years. Emmetropic patients with presbyopia had implantation of allogenic corneal inlays in the nondominant eye. The uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) were evaluated in all eyes. A subjective visual acuity test system (Multifocal Lens Analyzer 3.0 application) was used to analyze the DoF by measuring the defocus curves.

RESULTS

No significant difference between the treated and fellow eyes in UDVA and CDVA was found, whereas UNVA was significantly better in the treated eyes ( P = .20, P = .07, P < .01, respectively). Comparing to the preoperative CDVA, there was a 1-line decrease in CDVA in 6 (%24) patients. The mean defocus curves reveal a DoF of 1.1 diopters (D) for the untreated eye at the logMAR = 0.2 threshold. By contrast, the mean DoF of the treated eye and binocularly was 2.8 D. The areas under the curve were significantly better in the near, intermediate, and total distances in the treated eyes, whereas it was better for the far distances in the untreated eyes. All values were significant ( P = .023 total, P < .01 others).

CONCLUSIONS

Allogenic presbyopic inlay implantation may be safe and provided a clinically and statistically significant increase in the DoF leading to good far, intermediate, and near-visual acuity in emmetropic presbyopic patients.

Functional outcomes after bilateral refractive lens exchange with a continuous-range-of-vision intraocular lens

PURPOSE

To clinically evaluate a diffractive continuous-range-of-vision intraocular lens (IOL) that combines bifocal and extended depth-of-focus technologies in refractive lens exchange (RLE) patients.

SETTING

University eye clinic.

DESIGN

Prospective interventional clinical study.

METHODS

Bilateral implantation of the TECNIS Synergy IOL was performed during a RLE procedure in 28 patients. At 3 months postoperatively, uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuities, uncorrected (UIVA) and distance-corrected (DCIVA) intermediate visual acuities at 80 cm, and uncorrected (UNVA) and distance-corrected (DCNVA) near visual acuities at 40 cm were assessed. Defocus curve testing and contrast sensitivity testing were also performed.

RESULTS

Binocular UDVA and CDVA of 56 eyes (28 patients) were -0.06 ± 0.07 logMAR and -0.13 ± 0.05 logMAR, respectively. UIVA and DCIVA were -0.06 ± 0.05 logMAR and -0.08 ± 0.06 logMAR, and UNVA and DCNVA were -0.01 ± 0.07 logMAR and -0.04 ± 0.07 logMAR. The defocus curve revealed a visual acuity of 0.10 logMAR or better from +0.50 to -3.00 diopters (D). Photopic contrast sensitivity at spatial frequencies 3.0, 6.0, 12.0, and 18.0 was 1.68 ± 0.20, 1.77 ± 0.19, 1.45 ± 0.18, and 1.02 ± 0.19 log units, respectively. Mesopic contrast sensitivity at the same frequencies was 1.56 ± 0.20, 1.44 ± 0.25, 0.92 ± 0.38, and 0.44 ± 0.37, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The Synergy IOL provided very good distance, intermediate, and near visual outcomes. A visual acuity of 0.10 logMAR or better was achieved from +0.50 to -3.0 D. Contrast sensitivity was within the normal range.

Visual Outcomes, Quality of Vision, Patient Satisfaction and Spectacle Independence After Bilateral Implantation of the Synergy™ Intraocular Lens

Purpose

To evaluate vision, visual quality, patient satisfaction and spectacle independence after bilateral implantation of the TECNIS Synergy™ intraocular lens.

Setting

Two clinical practices in the USA.

Design

Ambispective unmasked non-randomized clinical trial.

Methods

Patients with a history of uneventful bilateral femtosecond laser assisted cataract surgery with the study IOL implanted, targeted for emmetropia, at least 3 months prior to the study visit were enrolled. Monocular and binocular visual acuity (VA) were measured at distance, intermediate and near, along with binocular mesopic VA. Low contrast binocular VA and reading speed in mesopic and photopic conditions were also measured. Patient satisfaction, spectacle independence, visual symptoms, and functional vision questionnaires were completed.

Results

Results from 52 subjects were available for analysis. Mean binocular unaided visual acuity was ~0.1 logMAR (20/20) from distance to 33 cm, with 81% of subjects having 0.2 logMAR (20/25) vision or better at all test distances and 92% reporting never needing glasses at any distance. Average reading speed at 40 cm was only 10 words/minute slower in dim light (p = 0.03). Mesopic and low contrast acuity appeared good. Halos were the most frequent and bothersome visual disturbances, with the greatest effect on driving at night. Eighty-eight percent of subjects reported being "completely" or "mostly" satisfied with their overall unaided vision.

Conclusion

This hybrid technology IOL provided a range of binocular visual acuity from distance to 33 cm and good functional vision, even in dim light. Patients should be advised of the likelihood of visual disturbances, particularly halos.

Reversible Multifocality Achieved Through Polypseudophakia

Simultaneous implantation of a monofocal or monofocal toric intraocular lens (IOL) into the capsular bag and a multifocal IOL into the ciliary sulcus, referred to as duet procedure, allows us to create multifocality that is more easily reversible than the implantation of a capsular bag-fixated multifocal IOL. The optical quality and results after the duet procedure are equivalent to those of a capsular bag-fixated multifocal IOL. Patients who cannot tolerate the side effects of multifocal optics or who develop an ocular condition leading to loss of function such as age-related macular degeneration (AMD) or glaucoma in the course of their lives may benefit from the reversibility of the procedure.

Assessing Visual Outcomes: A Comparative Study of US-FDA Premarket Approval Data for Multifocal and EDOF Lens Implants in Cataract Surgery

This study compares the efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes of three intraocular implants (IOL): Tecnis Synergy IOL, AcrySof IQ PanOptix Trifocal, and Tecnis Symfony EDOF IOL. Participants achieving 20/20 or better uncorrected binocular visual acuity were as follows: Synergy-67% distance, 64% intermediate, and 47% near; PanOptix-73% distance, 73% intermediate, and 50% near; and Symfony-63% distance, 75% intermediate, and 22% near. Symfony demonstrated superior intermediate visual acuity compared to Synergy (p = 0.0182) for those achieving 20/25 or better. Both Synergy and PanOptix showed superiority over Symfony for near visual acuity (p < 0.0001). Halos were statistically more common in Synergy participants compared to PanOptix (p = 0.0013) and Symfony (p < 0.0001). Each trial lens outperformed its monofocal IOL in terms of independence from glasses or contacts, with Synergy and PanOptix showing statistical significance over Symfony. Comparing contrast sensitivities and defocus curves was challenging due to data variance and as such, standardization of United States Food and Drug Administration (US-FDA) data reporting is key for better comparison of outcomes among different IOL platforms.

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.].

Analysis of Daily Visual Habits in a Presbyopic Population

Purpose

To evaluate and report the visual habits and requirements of a sample of presbyopic patients using an advanced sensor.

Methods

Transversal study collecting clinical data from 40 presbyopes candidates for presbyopia-correction intraocular lens (IOL) implantation with mean age of 61.0 years (43-80 years). A complete ophthalmological examination was performed in all patients including visual, refractive, an ocular biometric analysis. Furthermore, patients were instructed about the use of the Vivior Monitor system (Vivior AG, Zürich, Switzerland), which consists of a series of sensors attached to the rim of the patient's glasses that capture information about the visual behavior of the patient. This device was worn for a period of 36 hours or more. The data collected were transferred to a database and analyzed.

Results

Mean percentages of time dedicated to distance, intermediate, and near vision were 27.25 ± 11.93% (5-65%), 30.23 ± 9.36% (12-50%), and 42.53 ± 14.96% (13-78%), respectively. Mean percentages of time performing activities under photopic, mesopic, and scotopic conditions were 37.08 ± 23.20% (5-87%), 33.65 ± 13.84% (6-67%), and 29.28 ± 17.03% (4-65%). The percentage of time with digital screens ranged from 2% to 48%. Age was significantly correlated with the percentage of time dedicated to distance vision (r = 0.317, p=0.047) and to activities performed under photopic conditions (r = -0.344, p=0.030).

Conclusions

Distance and illumination conditions used to perform different daily life visual activities vary significantly among presbyopes, with a trend to the dedication of more time to intermediate and near visual activities performed under photopic and mesopic conditions. Data interpretation should be done with care until a proper validation of the device used.

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.

Early patient-reported outcomes of cataract surgery with implantation of the trifocal liberty 677MY intraocular lens: A pilot study

PURPOSE

To report our first clinical and patient-reported outcomes in the early postoperative period with a new model of trifocal diffractive intraocular lens (IOL).

METHODS

Pilot prospective analysis of the results of 26 eyes of 13 patients (age, 44-79 years) undergoing cataract surgery with implantation of the trifocal diffractive IOL Liberty 677MY (Medicontur Medical Engineering Ltd., Zsámbék, Hungary). The following clinical outcomes were evaluated during the first postoperative month: measurement of distance, intermediate and near visual acuity, binocular defocus curve, and level of spectacle independence, patient satisfaction, perception of photic phenomena, and difficulty in performing several vision-related daily tasks by means of a questionnaire.

RESULTS

Mean binocular LogMAR uncorrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuities were -0.03 ± 0.13, 0.21 ± 0.16, and 0.16 ± 0.09, respectively. Furthermore, 100.0%, 84.6% and 92.3% of patients achieved a binocular corrected distance, distance-corrected intermediate and distance-corrected near visual acuity of 20/32 or better, respectively. In the defocus curve, visual acuities were better than 0.2 logMAR for defocus levels between +1.00 and -3.00 D. Spectacle independence was referred by all patients, with any of them reporting dissatisfaction with the outcome of the surgery. The postoperative vision did not lead to difficulties in the daily life in 92.3% of patients. Bothersome halos, glare or starbursts were only reported by only 7.7% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The trifocal IOL evaluated provides a successful visual rehabilitation with minimal photic phenomena associated, leading to high levels of spectacle independence and patient satisfaction.

Comparative analysis of a presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens that combines extended depth-of-focus and bifocal profiles with a standard monofocal intraocular lens

Background

Recently, a new presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL) that combines extended depth-of-focus and bifocal profiles (ZFR00: Tecnis® Synergy®, Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, USA) has been established and several studies have been reported. We attempted to compare the performance with a standard IOL (ZCB00: Tecnis® monofocal, Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, USA) manufactured using the same material from the same company, which has been extensively used worldwide.

Methods

The medical records of patients undergoing cataract surgery with ZCB00 or ZFR00 implantation between March 2021 and September 2021 and with available 3-month visit data were reviewed. Uncorrected near, intermediate, and distance visual acuity (VA), corrected distance VA, and optical quality were the main outcome measures.

Results

This study included forty-six patients (64 eyes), with twenty-one patients (32 eyes) implanted with ZCB00 and twenty-five patients (32 eyes) implanted with ZFR00. The average age of the patients was 66.0 ± 10.1 (range: 40 to 82) and 65.1 ± 4.7 (range: 59 to 77) years in the ZCB00 and ZFR00 groups, respectively. The preoperative characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. Compared to the ZCB00 group, the ZFR00 group demonstrated significantly superior intermediate and near VA (p < 0.001) at 3 months postoperatively. The ZFR00 group showed significantly lower objective measured optical quality than that in the ZCB00 group.

Conclusions

The ZFR00 exhibited a continuous range of vision and a smooth defocus curve, while the ZCB00 provided superior objective optical quality.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12886-022-02516-6.

Comparison of visual results and optical quality of two presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses: TECNIS symfony versus TECNIS synergy

PURPOSE

This study compared the extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) (ZXR00; Tecnis® Symfony^®, Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, USA) and a new presbyopia-correcting IOL that combines EDOF and multifocal profiles (ZFR00; Tecnis^® Synergy^®, Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, USA) with the same material.

METHODS

The medical records of patients undergoing cataract surgery with ZXR00 or ZFR00 implantation between March 2021 and July 2021 and with the data available for the 3-month visit were reviewed. The uncorrected near, intermediate, and distance visual acuity (VA), corrected distance VA, defocus curves, refractive errors (RE), optical quality parameters, and patient-reported visual performance parameters were the main outcome measures.

RESULTS

Among the twenty-three enrolled patients, twelve patients (21 eyes) received ZXR00 and nine patients (17 eyes) received ZFR00. The mean age of the patients was 59.6 ± 10.6 (range: 49 to 70) and 65.2 ± 8.2 (range: 45 to 82) years in ZXR00 and ZFR00 groups, respectively, without significant difference. There was not a significant difference between the two groups in terms of baseline parameters and postoperative RE. The ZFR00 group showed markedly superior intermediate and near VA (p < 0.001 for all) at 3 months postoperatively. In terms of optical quality, ZXR00 was significantly better than ZFR00 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both IOLs had comparable distance VA. ZFR00 IOL was superior for intermediate and near visual acuity, but ZXR00 IOL was better for optical quality. Research with more participants is needed to support this finding.