Visual outcomes, satisfaction, and spectacle independence with a nondiffractive extended vision intraocular lens targeted for slight monovision

BCLA CLEAR presbyopia: Management with intraocular lenses

Cataract surgery including intraocular lens (IOL) insertion, has been refined extensively since the first such procedure by Sir Harold Ridley in 1949. The intentional creation of monovision with IOLs using monofocal IOL designs has been reported since 1984. The first reported implantation of multifocal IOLs was published in 1987. Since then, various refractive and or diffractive multifocal IOLs have been commercialised. Most are concentric, but segmented IOLs are also available. The most popular are trifocal designs (overlaying two diffractive patterns to achieve additional focal planes at intermediate and near distances) and extended depth of focus designs which leave the patient largely spectacle independent with the reduced risk of bothersome contrast reduction and glare. As well as mini-monovision, surgical strategies to minimise the impact of presbyopia with IOLs includes mixing and matching lenses between the eyes and using IOLs whose power can be adjusted post-implantation. Various IOL designs to mimic the accommodative process have been tried including hinge optics, dual optics, lateral shifts lenses with cubic-type surfaces, lens refilling and curvature changing approaches, but issues in maintaining the active mechanism with post-surgical fibrosis, without causing ocular inflammation, remain a challenge. With careful patient selection, satisfaction rates with IOLs to manage presbyopia are high and anatomical or physiological complications rates are no higher than with monofocal IOLs.

Clinical Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction of an Enhanced Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens Targeted for Mini-Monovision

Purpose

To assess the clinical outcomes, the rate of spectacle independence, and patient satisfaction of an enhanced depth of focus (EDOF) LuxSmart™ IOL targeted for mini-monovision in patients who had undergone bilateral cataract surgery.

Methods

Twenty patients underwent bilateral LuxSmart IOL implantation with the non-dominant eye targeted for -0.50 diopters. Best-corrected distance (CDVA) and uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) at 66 cm, uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) at 40 cm, and defocus curve were assessed. Patient-reported visual function was inquired by Catquest-9SF, and the rate of spectacle independence in all daily-life activities was calculated. The presence of photic phenomena was evaluated. A p-value lower than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

The mean IOL power was +21.50 ± 4D (16.5-26D), and all were non-toric. Thirty-seven (92.5%) eyes were within ±0.5D of predicted target. The postoperative MRSE was 0.06 ± 0.42D and -0.45 ± 0.22D in dominant and non-dominant eyes. Every patient achieved distance binocular vision better than 0.1 logMAR. The non-dominant eyes showed lower CDVA (p<0.001). The UIVA was higher in non-dominant eyes (p<0.001). Binocular uncorrected near visual acuity was 0.12 ± 0.1, and uncorrected near visual acuity was higher in non-dominant eyes (p<0.001). LuxSmart IOL provided a sustained visual acuity of 0.3 logMAR or better between +1.00D and -2.50D. A total of 25% of patients reported frequent halos and glare. Despite achieving higher degrees of satisfaction, seven patients (35%) denied total spectacle independence in their daily-life activities, particularly for activities requiring continuous near vision.

Conclusion

This study shows that LuxSmart EDOF IOL in mini-monovision strategy performs well for distance and intermediate vision. Although visual acuity for near also achieved very good results, the considerable rate of spectacle dependence, in particular for near, and the rate of photic phenomena do not support this IOL to be safely implanted in patients desiring spectacle independence at time of cataract surgery.

Factors influencing dominant eye selection in refractive surgery patients: A correlation analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to reveal the factors influencing the selection of the dominant eye in refractive surgery patients, and enhance the accuracy of clinical evaluation and surgical treatment.

METHODS

A retrospective study method was employed. The ocular biometric parameters were analyzed in 4,114 patients who underwent refractive surgery at the affiliated hospital of Southwest Medical University from 2019 to 2023.

RESULTS

The study found that 79.07% of the patients had the right eye as the dominant eye, while 20.93% had the left eye. Although there was no significant difference between the dominant and non-dominant eyes in terms of uncorrected visual acuity and Kappa angle, the dominant eye performed better in aspects such as spherical lens, eye axis, and corneal flat curvature. Furthermore, univariate and multivariate logistic regression results showed that best-corrected visual acuity, pupil diameter, horizontal displacement x-value of the Kappa angle, and astigmatism vector J45 were significant influencing factors for the selection of the dominant eye.

CONCLUSION

There are numerous factors affecting the dominant eye, and the most important core factor is J45. This study comprehensively evaluated the possible factors affecting the dominant eye in patients undergoing refractive surgery, which provides a foundation for the designation of refractive surgical modalities and assurance of surgical outcomes, and opens up new perspectives on understanding the mechanisms of the formation and development of the dominant eye.

Comparing Visual Performance and Subjective Outcomes with an Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lens When Targeted for Emmetropia or Monovision

Purpose

To evaluate relative visual performance and subjective outcomes after implantation of the TECNIS Eyhance™ intraocular lens (IOL) targeted for bilateral emmetropia or monovision.

Methods

This was a prospective, single-center randomized, patient-masked trial. Patients were implanted with the enhanced IOL targeted for bilateral emmetropia or slight monovision (-0.75 D in the non-dominant eye). At 3 months the binocular visual acuity (VA) was measured at distance, intermediate and near, along with low contrast VA in photopic and mesopic conditions, and the distance corrected defocus curve. Questionnaires related to spectacle independence, satisfaction, visual symptoms, and functional vision were administered.

Results

Data from 71 subjects (34 Emmetropia, 37 Monovision) were analyzed. There was no difference in the mean uncorrected distance VA (p = 0.11), but uncorrected intermediate and near VAs were one line better in the Monovision group (p = 0.02 and 0.01, respectively). Mesopic and photopic low contrast VA were similar between groups. There was a trend for less difficulty and higher satisfaction with near and intermediate vision in the Monovision group, but no significant differences in any of the subjective questionnaires. Difficulty reading was the most reported concern in both groups, though 93% of all subjects reported "little" or "no" difficulty with daily activities. Overall, 82% of subjects were "completely" or "very" happy with their lens choice.

Conclusion

Using this enhanced IOL with slight monovision in the non-dominant eye increased intermediate and near VA with no apparent effect on low contrast distance VA, subjective visual quality, or satisfaction.