Visual acuity, defocus curve and patient satisfaction of a new hybrid EDOF-multifocal diffractive intraocular lens

Functional outcomes and quality of life after AcrySof IQ Vivity intraocular lens implantation in a real-world study

The extended depth-of-focus AcrySof IQ Vivity intraocular lens technology offers promising features for presbyopia management, evaluated in this research in a 6 months real-world setting. Prospective interventional mono-centric study including 40 patients who underwent elective bilateral phacoemulsification. We performed one pre-operative visit (V0) and one evaluation six months post-operatively (V1), evaluating uncorrected and corrected visual acuity for near (UNVA/CNVA), intermediate (UIVA/CIVA) and far (UDVA/UCVA), slit-lamp evaluation, tomography with static pupillometry, endothelial cell count and contrast sensitivity chart. In order to assess post-operative Quality of Life, we administered the patients McAlinden's Quality of Vision test and Morlock's Patient-Reported Spectacle Independence Questionnaire. We divided eyes in with Toric-IOL and with non-Toric IOL. A total of 36 eyes received non-tonic IOL implantation, whereas 44 eyes received toric IOL implantation. There were no statistically significant disparities observed in visual outcome measures and contrast sensitivity between the toric group and the non-toric group. Furthermore, we assessed the predictive preoperative refractive astigmatism (PPRA) and residual refractive astigmatism (RRA) in both cohorts, and no statistical significance was found between the two cohorts (p = 0.08). Twenty-one (53%) patients reported total independence from their glasses at all distances. The mean difference between the predicted and measured refractive error, as calculated by spherical equivalent, was 0.09 D. AcrySof IQ Vivity is a well-tolerated and effective IOL with optimal refractive target for both distant and intermediate vision, needing slight spherical addition for the best near vision. Great questionnaire-based satisfaction was reported by the patients.

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.

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.

A comparative study of two presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses combining bifocal and extended depth-of-focus profiles

OBJECTIVE

To compare the visual performance of two presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs) that combine both bifocal and extended depth-of-focus profiles, Artis® Symbiose® Plus (Symbiose Plus; Cristalens Industrie, Lannion, France) and Tecnis® Synergy® (Synergy; Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, USA).

METHODS

The medical records of patients with cataract bilaterally implanted with either Symbiose Plus or Synergy between January 2022 and January 2023 were assessed. The principal measures of postoperative findings included uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near (40 and 33 cm) visual acuity (UNVA), objective optical quality (OOQ) parameters, distance-corrected defocus curve analysis, and surveys of subjective satisfaction.

RESULTS

Total of 96 eyes from 48 patients were enrolled. Each group was equally composed of 24 patients, 48 eyes. There were no significant differences between the two groups on baseline characteristics. Both IOLs displayed excellent binocular UDVA, CDVA, and UNVA (40 and 33 cm) with no statistical difference (p = 0.467(UDVA), p = 0.584(CDVA), p = 0.096(40-cm UNVA), and p = 0.621(33-cm UNVA)). However, with regard to UIVA, the Synergy group showed significantly superior results (p < 0.001). In contrast, the Symbiose Plus group showed significantly better results on OOQ parameters and patient-reported quality of vision survey outcomes (both p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both IOLs provided a decent continuous range of vision from near to far distance.

Outcomes and predictive factors in multifocal and extended depth of focus intraocular lens implantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Options for addressing presbyopia with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation have become more varied and sophisticated. We reviewed recent literature on multifocal and extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOLs in order to provide insight on their respective advantages, with emphasis on the visual outcomes of each design.

RECENT FINDINGS

Increased patient age, spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) abnormalities, abnormal optical axis measurements, and better preoperative visual acuity have been implicated as predictors of worse postoperative vision or visual quality in multifocal IOLs. Despite differences in objective outcomes, patient-reported outcomes such as satisfaction are consistently similar between multifocal and EDOF IOLs. EDOFs may have slightly lower rates of spectacle independence than trifocals, but there is more support for their use in the setting of with other ocular conditions.

SUMMARY

Multifocal and EDOF IOLs are both viable options for patients who wish to preserve near vision. Given their similar objective performance in many aspects, enabling patients to make informed decisions based on their expectations and visual requirements is critical to postoperative satisfaction. Evidence for advanced technology IOL implantation in pediatric patients remains inconclusive.

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.

Clinical outcomes of a new four-haptic hydrophobic presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens

A new presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL) combining bifocal and extended-depth-of-focus profiles (Symbiose: Artis Symbiose Plus; Cristalens Industrie, Lannion, France) was introduced. We compared the output with that of a standard monofocal IOL (PL E: Artis PL E). The two four-haptic hydrophobic IOLs were made of the same material from the same company. Cataract patients bilaterally implanted with either PL E or Symbiose between November 2021 and August 2022 were reviewed. The principal measures of the postoperative results were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA); corrected distance VA (CDVA); uncorrected intermediate VA; uncorrected near VA; objective optical quality; and distance-corrected defocus curves. This study included forty-eight patients (96 eyes), with 22 and 26 patients (44 and 52 eyes, respectively) being implanted with PL E and Symbiose, respectively. All patients received the same type of IOL implanted in both eyes. The average age of patients was 70.9 ± 7.1 and 60.0 ± 8.5 years in PL E and Symbiose groups, respectively, with significantly younger patients in Symbiose group (p < 0.001). Both IOLs displayed excellent UDVA and CDVA with no statistical difference (p = 0.081 (monocular UDVA), p = 0.599 (monocular CDVA), p = 0.204 (binocular UDVA), and p = 0.145 (binocular CDVA)). In comparison with PL E group, Symbiose group showed significantly superior postoperative intermediate and near VA (p < 0.001). PL E group showed significantly superior objective optical quality compared with Symbiose group (p < 0.001). Symbiose provides a continuous range of vision that ensures a seamless transition from far to near with no discontinuity. It also delivers a smooth defocus curve with a larger landing area than the PL E. But the objective optical quality was better in PL E.

Clinical Evaluation of Reading Performance in Refractive Lens Exchange With a Diffractive Continuous-Range-of-Vision Intraocular Lens

PURPOSE

Evaluation of reading performance with a novel presbyopia correcting intraocular lens (IOL) in refractive lens exchange using an electronic reading desk.

DESIGN

Prospective interventional before-and-after clinical study.

METHODS

In total, 56 eyes of 28 patients were included. Bilateral implantation of the TECNIS Synergy IOL (Johnson & Johnson Surgical Vision) during a bilateral delayed sequential refractive lens exchange procedure. Uncorrected and distance corrected reading acuity, reading distance, reading speed, and the smallest print size that could be read effectively at a set (40 cm/80 cm) and subjectively chosen near and intermediate distance were assessed using the Salzburg Reading Desk preoperatively and 6 months after surgery.

RESULTS

Uncorrected near reading acuity increased from 0.61 ± 0.16 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) preoperatively to 0.05 ± 0.09 logMAR postoperatively at the set near distance (40 cm) and from 0.60 ± 0.11 logMAR to 0.07 ± 0.08 logMAR at the subjectively preferred distance (39.6 ± 5.3 cm and 37.7 ± 4.3 cm). Uncorrected intermediate reading acuity was 0.39 ± 0.19 logMAR preoperatively and 0.08 ± 0.07 logMAR postoperatively at the set intermediate distance (80 cm) and 0.43 ± 0.21 logMAR preoperatively and 0.07 ± 0.08 logMAR postoperatively at the preferred intermediate distance (73.5 ± 9.5 cm and 73.3 ± 5.9 cm).

CONCLUSIONS

Uncorrected intermediate and near reading function considerably improved after bilateral implantation of the TECNIS Synergy IOL. Patients preferred a closer near and intermediate distance to the set distances. However, reading function was comparable for the set and subjectively preferred distances.

Latest Development in Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lenses: An Update

In recent years, there has been an overwhelming influx of different types of intraocular lenses (IOLs) as treatment for presbyopia. The extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) technology creates a single elongated focal point to enhance depth of focus, in contrast to the multiple foci of multifocal (MF) lenses. In this way, the EDOF lenses aim to reduce photic phenomena, glare, and halos, which have been reported in MF IOLs. A potential disadvantage of this is a blur due to decreased retinal image quality when the amount of the aberrations is increased excessively. Multifocality and EDOF characteristics are not exclusive of each other. Frequently, EDOF IOLs are combined with MF optical designs, a bifocal IOL may exhibit EDOF characteristics, likewise an aspheric monofocal IOL or a diffractive or refractive trifocal IOL. Thus, EDOF lenses are commonly subjected to confusion. A wide range of different types of EDOF lenses are available on the market to surgeons. In this practical update, we aim to clarify what is a true EDOF lens, classify the different types of the EDOF lenses based on their optical principle and review their recently reported outcomes. Comprehensive patient examination and selection, combined with knowledge of the most updated options and adequate patient counseling, can avoid dissatisfaction and yield the desired outcomes.

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.

Comparison of Bilateral Reading Performance Among Two Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the performance of a trifocal diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) and a lens combining a bifocal diffractive profile and extended depth of focus (EDOF) profile.

METHODS

This non-randomized, prospective comparative study included 42 patients (84 eyes) undergoing lens surgery with implantation of either the FineVision HP trifocal IOL (PhysIOL) or TECNIS Synergy bifocal EDOF IOL (Johnson and Johnson Surgical Vision). There were 21 patients (42 eyes) in each group. The primary outcome was reading speed at high contrast and luminance. Secondary outcomes were reading speed at lower contrasts and luminances, visual acuity at all distances (distance, intermediate, and near) with and without correction, and quality of vision.

RESULTS

The reading speed at high contrast (100%) and high luminance (100%) was better in the Synergy group (P = .01). This difference between the two IOLs seemed to be preserved at lower contrasts and luminances. There was no statistically significant difference between visual acuities except for monocular uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (P = .046) in favor of the FineVision HP IOL. The mean spherical equivalents in the FineVision HP and Synergy groups were 0.14 ± 0.64 and 0.10 ± 0.33 diopters without significant difference between these means (P = .78). The defocus curve was more dome-shaped for the Synergy IOL. The evaluation of visual symptoms was comparable in both groups. The glare halo (Halometry test; Aston University) was smaller in the FineVision HP group (P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

The Synergy IOL appears to provide better reading speed and is less sensitive to refractive error. Both lenses provided excellent distance, intermediate, and near vision. [J Refract Surg. 2022;38(7):428-434.].

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.