In vitro comparative optical bench analysis of a spherical and aspheric optic design of the same IOL model

[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.

Effect of decentration and tilt on the in vitro optical quality of monofocal and trifocal intraocular lenses

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the effect of decentration and tilt on the optical quality of monofocal and trifocal intraocular lenses (IOL).

METHODS

Optical quality of a monofocal IOL (AcrySof IQ SN60WF; Alcon Laboratories, Inc., USA) and a trifocal IOL (AcrySof IQ PanOptix; Alcon Laboratories, Inc., USA) was assessed using an in vitro optical bench (OptiSpheric IOL R&D; Trioptics GmbH, Germany). At apertures of 3.0 mm and 4.5 mm, modulation transfer function (MTF) at spatial frequency of 50 lp/mm, MTF curve and the United States Air Force (USAF) resolution test chart of the two IOLs were measured and compared at their focus with different degrees of decentration and tilt. Optical quality at infinity, 60 cm and 40 cm and the through-focus MTF curves were compared when the two IOLs were centered at apertures of 3.0 mm and 4.5 mm. Spectral transmittance of the two IOLs was measured by the UV-visible spectrophotometer (UV 3300 PC; MAPADA, China).

RESULTS

The SN60WF and the PanOptix filtered blue light from 400 to 500 nm. Both IOLs at the far focus and the PanOptix at the intermediate focus showed a decrease in optical quality with increasing decentration and tilt. The PanOptix demonstrated enhanced optical quality compared to the previous gradient at the near focus at a decentration range of 0.3-0.7 mm with a 3.0 mm aperture, and 0.5 mm with a 4.5 mm aperture, whereas other conditions exhibited diminished optical quality with increasing decentration and tilt at the focus of both IOLs. When the two IOLs were centered, the SN60WF had better optical quality at infinity, while the PanOptix had better optical quality at 60 cm and 40 cm defocus. The optical quality of the SN60WF exceeded that of the PanOptix at far focus, with a 3 mm aperture decentration up to 0.7 mm and a 4.5 mm aperture decentration up to 0.3 mm; this observation held true for all tilts, irrespective of aperture size. As both decentration and tilt increased, the optical quality of the SN60WF deteriorated more rapidly than that of the PanOptix at the far focal point.

CONCLUSIONS

The SN60WF showed a decrease in optical quality with increasing decentration and tilt. Optical quality of the PanOptix at the near focus increased in some decentration conditions and decreased in some conditions, while it showed a decrease at the other focuses with increasing decentration. While tilt only had a negative effect on optical quality. When both IOLs were centered, the PanOptix provided a wider range of vision, while the SN60WF provided better far distance vision. At the far focus, the SN60WF has better resistance to tilt than the PanOptix, but the optical quality degrades more quickly when decentered and tilted.

Imaging Function and Relative Light Transmission of Explanted Opacified Hydrophilic Acrylic Intraocular Lenses

We evaluated the influence of intraocular lens (IOL) opacification on the optical performance of explanted hydrophilic acrylic IOLs. We performed a laboratory analysis of 32 Lentis LS-502-1 (Oculentis GmbH, Berlin, Germany) IOLs, explanted due to opacification, in comparison with six clear unused samples of the same IOL model. Using an optical bench setup, we obtained modulation transfer function (MTF), Strehl ratio, two-dimensional MTF, and United States Air Force (USAF) chart images. In addition, we assessed light transmission through the IOLs. The MTF values of opacified IOLs at 3-mm aperture were similar to those of clear lenses, with the median (interquartile range) values of 0.74 (0.01) vs. 0.76 (0.03) at the spatial frequency of 50 line pairs per millimeter in clear and opacified IOLs, respectively. The Strehl ratio of opacified lenses was not lower than that of clear lenses. The USAF-chart analysis showed a considerable reduction in brightness in opacified IOLs. The median (interquartile range) relative light transmission of opacified IOLs in comparison to clear lenses was 55.6% (20.8%) at the aperture size of 3 mm. In conclusion, the explanted opacified IOLs had comparable MTF values to those of clear lenses but significantly reduced light transmission.

Comparison of Five Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: Optical-Bench Assessment with Visual-Quality Simulation

Presbyopia correction through implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) is a modality offered to both cataract and refractive-lens exchange patients. To maximize postoperative satisfaction, IOL selection needs to be made based on patients’ requirements aligned with the available technology. Five Trifocal IOLs were assessed in this study, and their differentiating features were identified: Triumf POD L GF, AT Lisa Tri, Tecnis Synergy, AcrySof IQ PanOptix, and Acriva Trinova Pro C. The optical quality was assessed using the modulation-transfer-function principle. Simulated defocus curves were derived from a non-linear formula. Far-focus simulated visual acuity (simVA) was 0.03 logMAR or better for all the studied IOLs, showing minimal differences. However, each IOL’s intermediate focus position differed across a range from 61 cm to 80 cm; and for the near focus, it was 36 cm to 44 cm. Triumf demonstrated improved intermediate point at the expense of the near focus resulting in a lower predicted near VA. PanOptix exhibited the shortest range of vision without a clear distinction between intermediate and near-point. The remaining lenses presented three foci of comparable optical quality and, thus, simVA performance. Each model, however, revealed a different aperture-change response. Trinova function improved at intermediate but was worse at near for larger pupils. The opposite was observed for AT Lisa. Synergy’s optical quality change was predominantly associated with lower pupil diameter. In conclusion, the trifocal IOLs can be differentiated according to their secondary-foci position, light-energy distribution, and pupil-size-related behavior. The observed differences may translate directly into a clinical effect showing that the trifocal IOLs vary in their ability to deliver optimal vision at different distances, with some providing improved intermediate while others favor reading distance. The knowledge gained through this objective testing can support IOL selection, postoperative patient counselling and increase the chance of spectacle independence after surgery.

Comparative analysis of postoperative results of cataract surgery using monofocal IOLs

 

One of the most common surgical interventions in ophthalmology today is lens replacement surgery. But there is still no consensus on whether the choice of a monofocal IOL affects the postoperative functional outcome.The aim: to conduct a comparative analysis of values of visual acuity without correction in the early postoperative period after cataract surgery using monofocal IOLs.Material and methods. The study included data of 2643 eyes operated for cataract, into which one of the monofocal IOLs, included in the top ten most frequently implanted IOLs in the Orenburg Branch of the S. Fyodorov Eye Microsurgery Federal State Institution, was implanted for the period 2019–2021. Statistical analysis was performed using the program Statistica 13.0.Results. The performed analysis of variance showed that the established differences between the compared groups are statistically signifi cant (p < 0.05). However, the subgroup analysis showed that there were statistically signifi cant differences between pairs such as Tecnis and Hydro-4; Tecnis and Rayner. In all other cases, statistically signifi cant uncorrected visual activity (UCVA) values after surgery were not established. It has also been reliably established that the presence of subluxation of the lens affects the value of UCVA after surgery.Conclusion. The results of the performed analysis in general indicate that the value of UCVA in patients in the early postoperative period after the performed surgical intervention does not depend on the manufacturer of the used IOL.

Laboratory analysis and ray visualization of diffractive optics with enhanced intermediate vision

BACKGROUND

To assess the optical behavior of a new diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) and compare its performance to that of an established extended-depth-of-focus (EDOF) IOL.

METHODS

This study assessed the Proming EDOF Multifocal AM2UX [Eyebright Medical Technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd., China] and the AT LARA 829MP [Carl Zeiss Meditec, Germany]. An experimental set-up with 0.01% fluorescein solution and monochromatic light (532 nm) was used to visualize the IOLs' ray propagation. In addition, the optical quality of the IOLs was assessed by measuring the modulation transfer function (MTF) values at 50lp/mm and 3.0 and 4.5 mm apertures on the optical bench OptiSpheric® IOL PRO II [Trioptics GmbH, Germany].

RESULTS

The ray propagation of the two IOLs showed two distinct foci. Light intensity assessment revealed that both IOLs allocate more energy to primary than secondary focus. At 3.0 mm pupil, the MTF values at 50lp/mm for the primary focus were 0.39 and 0.37, and for the secondary focus, 0.29 and 0.26 for the AT LARA and Proming IOLs, respectively. At 4.5 mm pupil, the single-frequency MTF for the primary focus was 0.51 and 0.24 and for the secondary focus 0.21 and 0.15 for the AT LARA and Proming IOLs, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

When tested with an aberration-free model cornea under monochromatic conditions, the Proming behaved as a low-add bifocal lens; however, its properties did not differ much from the well-established AT LARA EDOF IOL. The AT LARA outperformed the Proming at low defocus (up to 2D), while the latter demonstrated better image quality in the 2-3D range.

Progressive-toric IOL design reduces residual astigmatism with increasing pupil size: a ray-tracing simulation based on corneal topography data

Population studies indicate that astigmatism decreases from the corneal center toward the periphery. A standard toric intraocular lens (IOL) with a constant cylinder power cannot correct uniformly across this gradient. We built an astigmatic eye model based on corneal topography data. A progressive-toric lens with gradually decreasing cylinder power was compared with an identically designed lens but featuring conventional astigmatism correction. Residual astigmatism did not differ significantly (P=0.06) at 3 mm, and the Strehl ratio was identical for both lenses (0.51 ±0.15, P=0.88). At 5 mm, the progressive IOL yielded significantly lower residual astigmatism by 0.10 D (P<0.001). The Strehl ratio was 0.30 ±0.08 with the progressive and 0.29 ±0.08 with the standard lens (P<0.001). At 3 mm, the optical performance was comparable for both IOLs. However, at 5 mm, the progressive-toric was more effective in correcting astigmatism, and it yielded reduced residual astigmatism compared to a standard toric lens.

Ray propagation imaging and optical quality evaluation of different intraocular lens models

PURPOSE

Ray propagation visualization and optical performance analysis of four different intraocular lenses (IOLs).

METHODS

In this laboratory study, four IOLs with different optical designs were assessed: a monofocal AcrySof IQ SN60WF [Alcon], a diffractive-refractive bifocal AcrySof IQ Restor SN6AD1 [Alcon], a diffractive trifocal AcrySof IQ PanOptix TFNT00 [Alcon], and a diffractive extended-depth-of-focus (EDOF) Symfony ZXR00 [Johnson&Johnson]. An experimental set-up with a water bath containing 0.01% fluorescein solution and monochromatic green laser light (532 nm) was used to visualize the propagation of light rays. Also, the optical performance of the IOLs was evaluated by measuring the modulation transfer function (MTF) values at a pupil sizes of 3.0 and 4.5 mm on the optical bench OptiSpheric® IOL PRO II (Trioptics GmbH, Germany).

RESULTS

Both the diffractive-refractive bifocal IOL and the EDOF IOL showed two defined foci for distance and near vision. In the diffractive trifocal IOL, three distinct foci for distance, intermediate, and near vision could be visualized.

CONCLUSIONS

The ray propagation visualization technique allows a qualitative assessment and comparison of light energy distribution between different IOL models. The measured Through-Focus Response (TFR) quantitatively confirmed the evaluated ray propagation behavior.

[Optical quality of three trifocal intraocular lens models : An optical bench comparison]

BACKGROUND

Knowledge of the optical quality of different trifocal intraocular lenses (IOL) is important in customized patient care.

OBJECTIVE

Different trifocal IOL were compared regarding their optical quality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed the FineVision (PhysIOL, Liège, Belgium), the AT LISA tri 839MP (Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany), and the AcrySofIQ PanOptix (Alcon, Fort Worth, TX, USA) with a power of +21D for the distance using the OptiSpheric IOL PRO optical bench (Trioptics, Wedel, Germany). The additions for the near and intermediate distances were as follows: +3.5D/+1.75D (FineVision), +3.33D/+1.66D (AT LISA tri), and + 3,25D/+ 2,17D (PanOptix). We evaluated the modulation transfer function (MTF) at a spatial frequency of 50lp/mm and the Strehl ratio using 3‑ (photopic) and 4.5-mm (mesopic) apertures.

RESULTS

The MTF at 50 lp/mm (FineVision/AT Lisa tri/PanOptix) at the far focus was 0.373/0.399/0.400 (3-mm aperture) and 0.512/0.311/0.243 (4.5-mm aperture). At the intermediate focus, the MTF was 0.162/0.147/0.153 (3-mm aperture) and 0.092/0.125/0.137 (4.5-mm aperture). The MTF at the near focus was 0.229/0.192/0.404 (3-mm aperture) and 0.217/0.212/0.169 (4.5-mm aperture). The Strehl ratio was 0.335/0.298/0.370 (3-mm aperture) and 0.243/0.180/0.270 (4.5-mm aperture) at the far focus. At intermediate distances, the Strehl ratio was 0.189/0.185/0.162 (3-mm aperture) and 0.099/0.097/0.114 (4.5-mm aperture). The Strehl ratio was 0.305/0.283/0.464 (3-mm aperture) and 0.177/0.181/0.155 (4.5-mm aperture) at the near focus.

CONCLUSION

Evaluation of the three trifocal IOL models at the optical bench could show distinct peaks at the far, intermediate, and near focus. The results were comparable in terms of optical performance.

Comprehensive Evaluation of Retinal Image Quality in Comparing Different Aspheric to Spherical Intraocular Lens Implants

Purpose: To compare the visual and optical quality of eyes implanted with three aspheric versus two spherical intraocular lenses (IOL) after cataract surgery. Methods: This prospective comparative study included 349 eyes of 349 patients with age-related cataract and undergone uneventful phacoemulsification. Implanted posterior monofocal IOLs have an aspheric optic (Tecnis ZCB00 [Johnson & Johnson Vision], Acrysof IQ SN60WF [Alcon], Akreos AO [Bausch & Lomb]) or a spherical optic (Akreos [Bausch & Lomb], Sensar AR40e [Johnson & Johnson Vision]). Postoperatively, objective optical quality parameters were performed using an Optical Quality Analysis System II (Visiometrics), and wave-front aberrations were assessed using a KR-1W aberrometer (Topcon). Meanwhile, subjective visual acuity was performed using a logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution chart at 3 months after cataract surgery. Results: Statistical significant differences (P < .05) across all groups were found regarding intraocular and total ocular spherical aberration (SA) at 4.0 mm and 6.0 mm pupil diameter and total high-order aberration (tHOA) at 6.0 mm pupil diameter. Furthermore, differences among the evaluated groups were observed regarding several objective parameters such as objective scatter index (OSI), modulation transfer function cutoff (MTF cutoff), Strehl ratio (SR) at two dimensions and contrast visual acuity (OV) at three contrast levels. Conclusions: The present results reflect the optical characteristics of IOL in vivo. The scattering light and high-order aberration may be the main reasons for the degradation of retinal imaging quality in comparing different aspheric to spherical IOL implants.