Visual Performance of a New Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lens Compared to a Distance-Dominant Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lens

Refractive Lens Exchange: A Review

In recent decades, technical advancements in lens surgery have considerably improved safety and refractive outcomes. This has led to a much broader range of indications for refractive lens exchange (RLE). Effective restoration of uncorrected distance and near visual acuity is possible with modern presbyopia correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs). Hyperopic patients who are fully presbyopic were identified as ideal candidates for RLE. For myopic patients, an increased risk of retinal detachment has been reported, which leads to a higher threshold to perform RLE in this patient group. The most frequent postoperative complications include posterior capsular opacification, deviation from the target refraction and cystoid macular edema. Thus, adequate planning of surgery, careful patient selection, as well as comprehensive counseling are crucial for successful RLE.

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.

Analysis of visual quality improvement after implantation of PanOptix trifocal intraocular lens in cataract patients with different axial lengths

OBJECTIVE

To assess the visual quality, both subjective and objective, of cataract patients with varying axial lengths (AL) after PanOptix trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation and investigated the lens tilt and its correlation with visual outcomes.

METHODS

From July 2020 to June 2022, 70 patients (140 eyes) diagnosed with age-related cataracts and undergoing PanOptix implantation at Chongqing Eye and Vision Care Hospital, Aier Eye Hospital Group, were included. Patients were assigned to either the observation group (35 cases, 70 eyes with PanOptix trifocal IOL) or the control group (35 cases, 70 eyes with bifocal IOL). Patients were further subdivided based on AL into AL < 24 mm (observation group: 23 eyes; control group: 26 eyes) and AL ≥ 24 mm (observation group: 47 eyes; control group: 44 eyes). Postoperative follow-up lasted three months. Visual acuity (distant, intermediate, near), objective visual quality (Strehl ratio: SR, total eye modulation transfer function (MTF)), and visual aberrations were measured preoperatively and at 3 months post-operation.

RESULTS

Postoperatively, all groups saw significant improvements in uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UCIVA), and uncorrected near visual acuity (UCNVA) compared to preoperative values (T0) (all P < 0.05). Notably, UCIVA was significantly better in the observation group than in the control group (P < 0.05). At three months (T1), reductions in total high-order aberration (tHOA), internal high-order aberration (iHOA), coma, and trefoil aberrations were observed in both groups compared to baseline, with more significant decreases in the observation group (all P < 0.05). Both SR and MTF cutoff showed marked improvement from T0 to T1, with the observation group experiencing greater enhancements (both P < 0.05). The defocus curve of the observation group showed a gentle slope between +0.5 D and -3.0 D, maintaining superior visual acuity compared to the control group (P < 0.05). Subjective visual quality scores at T1 were significantly higher than at T0 for both groups (P < 0.05), with patients in the observation group scoring higher than those in the control group across all AL categories (P < 0.05). Spearman correlation analysis indicated that the tilt after PanOptix trifocal IOL implantation was associated with tHOA (r = 0.273, P = 0.022), iHOA (r = 0.433, P < 0.001), Trefoil (r = 0.360, P = 0.002) and coma (r = 0.688, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

PanOptix trifocal IOL implantation in cataract patients across different AL significantly enhances visual quality compared to bifocal IOLs, suggesting a strong case for its clinical adoption.

Trifocal versus extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses after cataract extraction

BACKGROUND

Cataract, defined as an opacity of the lens in one or both eyes, is the leading cause of blindness worldwide. Cataract may initially be treated with new spectacles, but often surgery is required, which involves removing the cataract and placing a new artificial lens, usually made from hydrophobic acrylic. Recent advancements in intraocular lens (IOL) technology have led to the emergence of a diverse array of implantable lenses that aim to minimise spectacle dependence at all distances (near, intermediate, and distance). To assess the relative merits of these lenses, measurements of visual acuity are needed. Visual acuity is a measurement of the sharpness of vision at a distance of 6 metres (or 20 feet). Normal vision is 6/6 (or 20/20). The Jaegar eye card is used to measure near visual acuity. J1 is the smallest text and J2 is considered equivalent to 6/6 (or 20/20) for near vision.

OBJECTIVES

To compare visual outcomes after implantation of trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) to those of extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOLs. To produce a brief economic commentary summarising recent economic evaluations that compare trifocal IOLs with EDOF IOLs.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register), MEDLINE, Embase, and three trial registries on 15 June 2022. For our economic evaluation, we also searched MEDLINE and Embase using economic search filters to 15 June 2022, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database (EED) from 1968 up to and including 31 December 2014. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies comparing trifocal and EDOF IOLs in adults undergoing cataract surgery. We did not include studies involving people receiving IOLs for correction of refractive error alone (or refractive lens exchange in the absence of cataract).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Two review authors working independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted data from the reports. We assessed the risk of bias in the studies, and we assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five studies that compared trifocal and EDOF lenses in people undergoing cataract surgery. Three trifocal lenses (AcrySof IQ PanOptix, ATLISA Tri 839MP, FineVision Micro F) and one EDOF lens (TECNIS Symfony ZXR00) were evaluated. The studies took place in Europe and North America. Follow-up ranged from three to six months. Of the 239 enroled participants, 233 (466 eyes) completed follow-up and were included in the analyses. The mean age of participants was 68.2 years, and 64% of participants were female. In general, the risk of bias in the studies was unclear as methods for random sequence generation and allocation concealment were poorly reported, and we judged one study to be at high risk of performance and detection bias. We assessed the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes as low, downgrading for the risk of bias and for imprecision. In two studies involving a total of 254 people, there was little or no difference between trifocal and EDOF lenses for uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity worse than 6/6. Sixty per cent of participants in both groups had uncorrected distance visual acuity worse than 6/6 (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.88 to 1.27). Thirty-one per cent of the trifocal group and 38% of the EDOF group had corrected distance visual acuity worse than 6/6 (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.39). In one study of 60 people, there were fewer cases of uncorrected near visual acuity worse than J2 in the trifocal group (3%) compared with the EDOF group (30%) (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.65). In two studies, participants were asked about spectacle independence using subjective questionnaires. There was no evidence of either lens type being superior. One further study of 60 participants reported, "overall, 90% of patients achieved spectacle independence", but did not categorise this by lens type. All studies included postoperative patient-reported visual function, which was measured using different questionnaires. Irrespective of the questionnaire used, both types of lenses scored well, and there was little evidence of any important differences between them. Two studies included patient-reported ocular aberrations (glare and halos). The outcomes were reported in different ways and could not be pooled; individually, these studies were too small to detect meaningful differences in glare and halos between groups. One study reported no surgical complications. Three studies did not mention surgical complications. One study reported YAG capsulotomy for posterior capsular opacification (PCO) in one participant (one eye) in each group. One study reported no PCO. Two studies did not report PCO. One study reported that three participants (one trifocal and two EDOF) underwent laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) to correct residual myopic refractive error or astigmatism. One study reported a subset of participants who were considering laser enhancement at the end of the study period (nine trifocal and two EDOF). Two studies did not report laser enhancement rates. No economic evaluation studies were identified for inclusion in this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Distance visual acuity after cataract surgery may be similar whether the lenses implanted are trifocal IOLs or EDOF (TECNIS Symfony) IOLs. People receiving trifocal IOLs may achieve better near vision and may be less dependent on spectacles for near vision. Both lenses were reported to have adverse subjective visual phenomena, such as glare and halos, with no meaningful difference detected between lenses.

Toward an internationally accepted standard for reading charts

Patients who suffer from sight-threatening eye diseases share a desire to regain a comfortable reading ability. In light of the modern advances achieved in ophthalmic diagnosis and therapy, and because a significant lack of comparability between reading charts still exists, there is an increasing need for a worldwide standard in the form of a norm for diagnostic reading charts. Already, applied advancements such as digital print, which allow a calibration of the print sizes of reading charts in correctly progressing geometric proportions by using the actual height of a lower case "x" in millimeters (x-height), and psychophysically standardizing reading charts and their test items by applying modern statistical methods have significantly contributed to establishing a norm for reading charts. In 2020, a proposal of the British delegation was accepted by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) group "Visual Optics and Optical Instruments," and a working group was established. Bearing in mind the efforts of the ISO with regard to an international norm, this review article is intended to (a) give an overview of the historical background and related normative approaches for diagnostic reading tests used in ophthalmology and optometry, (b) explain psychophysical and technical concerns, and (c) discuss the possibilities and limits of concepts that seem relevant to developing a modern standard for reading charts.

Comparatively analysing the postoperative optical performance of different intraocular lenses: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Postoperative performance, including best corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA) and optical metrics (from the OQAS and iTrace devices), was compared among 4 different intraocular lenses (IOLs).

METHODS

This prospective observational study included 104 eyes from 104 subjects who underwent cataract surgery combined with implantation of 4 different IOLs: monofocal (Mon) IOLs, segmental refractive (SegRef) IOLs, diffractive (Dif) IOLs and extended depth of focus (EDoF) IOLs. Postoperative BCDVA and optical metrics were collected at the 6th month. The OQAS optical metrics included the objective scattering index (OSI), Strehl ratio (SR), modulation transfer function (MTF) cut-off frequency, and predicted visual acuity (PVA); the iTrace optical metrics included blur/double vision, glare/halo, starburst, mixed focus, night myopia, and night hyperopia.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in BCDVA among the 4 groups (P = 0.059; power = 70.3%). Differences were observed in all OQAS optical metrics among the groups (all P < 0.001). Overall, Mon IOLs and EDoF IOLs exhibited better performance than Dif IOLs and SegRef IOLs. Starburst was the only iTrace optical metric that differed among the groups (P < 0.001): SegRef IOLs caused more starbursts than Mon IOLs (P = 0.001), Dif IOLs (P = 0.006) and EDoF IOLs (P < 0.001). Spearman rank correlation analysis was used to determine the relationships among the iTrace optical metrics, OQAS optical metrics and BCDVA: starburst was negatively correlated with BCDVA, PVA at contrasts of 100% and 20%, OSI, and MTF cut-off frequency (all P ≤ 0.001); mixed focus was positively correlated with BCDVA, PVA at contrasts of 100% and 20%, OSI, and MTF cut-off frequency (all P ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative BCDVA and optical metrics varied among the different IOLs, which should be taken into account in the selection and management of IOLs for cataract patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was approved by the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University Ethical Review Board (No. 50 2022).

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.

Refractive extended depth-of-focus lens design based on periodic power profile for presbyopia correction

PURPOSE

Limitations of existing diffractive multifocal designs for presbyopia correction include discrete foci and photic phenomena such as halos and glare. This study aimed to explore a methodology for developing refractive extended depth-of-focus (EDoF) lenses based on a periodic power profile.

METHODS

The proposed design technique employed an optical power profile that periodically alternated between far, intermediate and near distances across the pupil radius. To evaluate the lens designs, optical bench testing was conducted. The impact on visual performance was assessed using a spatial light modulator-based adaptive optics vision simulator in human subjects. Additionally, the effects of pupil size change and lens decentration on retinal image quality were examined. A comparative performance analysis was carried out against a typical diffractive trifocal design and a monofocal lens.

RESULTS

The proposed design method was found to be effective in uniformly distributing light energy across all object distances within the desired depth of focus (DoF). While trade-offs between overall image quality and DoF still exist, the EDoF lens design, when tested in human subjects, provided a continuous DoF spanning over 2.25 D. The results also revealed that the EDoF design had a slightly higher dependence on changes in pupil size and lens decentration than the diffractive trifocal design.

CONCLUSION

The proposed design method showed significant potential as an approach for developing refractive EDoF ophthalmic lenses. These lenses offer a continuous DoF but are slightly more susceptible to variations in pupil size and decentration compared with the diffractive trifocal design.

Individual vs simultaneous macular and optic disc measurements with spectral domain optical coherence tomography in glaucoma and healthy eyes

We assessed the repeatability and agreement of ganglion cell complex (GCC) in the macular area and the peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (ppRNFL) with individual and combined macula and disc scans. The macular GCC and ppRNFL thicknesses from 34 control eyes and 43 eyes with glaucoma were measured with the Canon Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) HS-100. Two repeated measurements were performed with both scan modes. The repeatability limit (Rlim) and agreement analysis were performed. The individual scan showed better repeatability than the combined scan in both groups. However, the differences in the Rlim for the GCC in most sectors were lower than 3 μm (axial resolution of the OCT), and this was larger than 3 μm for most of the ppRNFL sectors. The mean differences in the thickness between both scan modes for the GCC and ppRNFL measurements were less than 3 and 6 μm, respectively. The interval of the limits of agreement was about 10 μm in some sectors for the GCC, and about 40 and 60 μm in some sectors in controls and glaucoma eyes, respectively. Both scan modes showed good repeatability in both groups. The agreement results suggest that the scan modes cannot be used interchangeably.

Comparison of visual outcomes in patients implanted with Tecnis Eyhance ICB00 and 1-Piece ZCB00 monofocal intraocular lenses

PURPOSE

To compare the visual outcomes and monocular defocus curve of a new monofocal Tecnis Eyhance IOL (Tecnis ICB00) with Tecnis 1 single piece (ZCB00).

METHODS

Eighty patients diagnosed with cataract were divided into two groups: Tecnis ICB00 (n = 40) and ZCB00 (n = 40). The visual outcome was evaluated using the following parameters: uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), distance corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA), corrected near visual acuity (CNVA), uncorrected visual acuity contrast sensitivity (UVACS), best-corrected visual acuity contrast sensitivity (BCVACS), manifest refraction, and defocus curve and was compared at the 6th week and 3 months after surgery.

RESULTS

The UIVA and UNVA were significantly (P < 0.05) better in ICB00 as compared with ZCB00 at 6 weeks and 3 months postoperative. The DCIVA was significantly better in ICB00 as compared with ZCB00 at 3 months postoperative (-0.015 ± 0.04 vs. 0.01 ± 0.020; P = 0.01). Regarding contrast sensitivity, UVACS and BCVACS were significantly better in ICB00 as compared with ZCB00 at 6 weeks and 3 months postoperative (P < 0.05). The defocus curves showed that the mean visual acuity of the ICB00 group was significantly better than that of the ZCB00 group at between - 0.5 D and - 2.50 D of defocus.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing cataract surgery, Eyhance ICB00 provided better intermediate vision as compared with ZCB00.

[Outcomes of extended depth of focus intraocular lenses implantation]

Extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses (IOLs) are the latest IOL designs. In recent years, several models of EDOF IOLs have become available in Russia, two of which (Tecnis Symfony and Acrysof IQ Vivity) are implanted in our clinic. Comparative studies devoted to the results of implantation of the new EDOF IOLs are rare in the available literature.

PURPOSE

This article compares the outcomes of implantation of two EDOF IOLs in patients with presbyopia and/or cataract.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The prospective study included 60 patients (81 eyes) after implantation of EDOF IOL Tecnis Symfony (32 patients, 45 eyes; group 1) or EDOF IOL AcrySof IQ Vivity (28 patients, 36 eyes; group 2). The mean follow-up period was 3.9±1.3 months.

RESULTS

All groups showed a significant (p<0.05) increase in uncorrected near visual acuity (UCNVA), intermediate visual acuity (UCIVA), and distance visual acuity (UCDVA) at the maximum follow-up time compared to preoperative values. In group 1, the best corrected near visual acuity (BCNVA) increased from 0.61±0.10 to 0.82±0.16 at the maximum follow-up time, and in group 2 - from 0.58±0.08 to 0.67±0.12 (p>0.05). Both groups showed a significant increase in best corrected intermediate and distance visual acuity (BCIVA and BCDVA) at the maximum follow-up time. The increase in the indicator compared to the preoperative period was not significant in both groups (p>0.05). The frequency of side optical phenomena was low in both groups. No significant differences were found between the groups (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study presents a comparative analysis of the results of implantation of two different EDOF IOLs. Both lenses were comparable in most of the studied parameters, including providing good distance and intermediate vision, functional near vision, as well as a low frequency of side optical phenomena. In all cases the patients were satisfied with the results of the surgical intervention.

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.

Results of an Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lens Implantation in the Second Eye of Monofocal Pseudophakic Patients: A Pilot Study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the visual results and patient satisfaction after implantation of an extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) in the second eye of patients implanted previously with a monofocal IOL in the first eye.

METHODS

The medical records and self-reported questionnaires from patients who were implanted with monofocal IOLs in the first eye and EDOF IOLs in the second eye (group A) and from patients implanted bilaterally with EDOF IOLs (group B) were compared for visual acuity (VA), spectacle independence, patient satisfaction, and photic phenomena.

RESULTS

Group A (23 eyes of 23 patients) had similar distance uncorrected VA and intermediate uncorrected VA compared with group B (72 eyes of 36 patients) (0.03±0.05 vs. 0.04±0.16; P =0.136 and 0.660, respectively). There was a tendency toward a better near uncorrected VA in group A compared with group B (0.15±0.14 vs. 0.23±0.17; P =0.074). Patients' perception of their VA was similar between groups. Spectacle independence for distance vision was reported by 16/17 (94.1%) and 35/36 (97.2%) patients ( P =0.543), 13/17 (76.5%) and 32/36 (88.9%) patients ( P =0.252) for intermediate vision, and 4/17 (23.6%) and 22/36 (61.1%) patients for near vision ( P =0.011), in groups A and B, respectively. There was no difference in complaints of photic phenomena between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients previously implanted with a monofocal IOL in 1 eye who are interested in improving their spectacle independence can be considered for an EDOF IOL implantation in the second eye and may have similar results to those implanted bilaterally with EDOF IOLs.

Agreement between Two Devices for Measuring Pupil Diameter in Patients Implanted with Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the agreement between three methods for measuring pupil size in patients implanted with multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs): Keratograph 5M (K5M), Pentacam AXL Wave (PW), and a simple hand ruler. Sixty-nine subjects implanted with MIOLs and measured at the three-month follow-up visit were included in this retrospective analysis. K5M and PW were used to measure the photopic (PP) and mesopic (MP) pupil sizes, and a hand ruler was used to measure the pupil under environmental light conditions (135 lux). The Bland-Altman method with its limits (LoAs) was used to assess the agreement. The median PP was 2.8, 2.95, and 3 mm for K5M, PW, and the ruler, respectively (p < 0.05). Differences in PP were statistically significant for all paired comparisons (p < 0.0005) except between PW and the ruler (p = 0.44). The LoAs for the difference in PP between K5M and PW was 0.63 mm. The mean difference for MP between K5M and PW was 0.04 mm (p = 0.34) with LoAs of 0.72 mm. MP measured with K5M and PW could be considered interchangeable, although a correction of -0.3 mm (IC95%: -0.23 to -0.39) should be applied to PP measured with PW to attain the K5M mean.

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.

Clinical Outcomes after Bilateral Implantation of Trifocal Diffractive Intraocular Lenses and Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses

The purpose of this retrospective study is to investigate clinical outcomes of bilateral implantation of diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and extended depth of focus IOLs in Koreans. The clinical outcomes of cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of PanOptix, FineVision, Symfony, and MiniWell were evaluated. Uncorrected distant, intermediate (80 cm, 60 cm), near (40 cm) visual acuity, defocus curve, manifest refraction, contrast sensitivity, and higher-order aberrations, quality of vision, spectacle independence, and subjective satisfaction at postoperative 3 months were assessed. A total of 136 eyes in 68 patients were included in the analyses. PanOptix and FineVision performed better visual acuity compared to Symfony and MiniWell at 40 cm distance. Defocus curve showed broad range of vision in PanOptix and FineVision with visual acuity of more than 0.1 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution at −2.5 diopter (D) of defocus power, while Symfony and MiniWell presented excellent intermediate vision without a dip at defocus power of −0.5 D to −1.0 D. Glare, halo, and starburst were significantly less in MiniWell compared to others. In conclusion, all four IOLs presented satisfactory clinical outcomes. PanOptix and FineVision provided good near and intermediate vision, while Symfony and MiniWell provided good intermediate vision. MiniWell induced little dysphotopsia.

Evaluation of Visual and Patient-Reported Outcomes, Spectacle Dependence after Bilateral Implantation with a Non-Diffractive Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens Compared to Other Intraocular Lenses

Purpose: To evaluate postoperative outcomes, spectacle dependance and the occurrence of the photic phenomena in patients after cataract surgery following the implantation of a non-diffractive extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens was compared to monofocal and multifocal lenses. Methods: We enrolled patients with bilateral cataracts who wanted to reduce their dependence on glasses in the study. They were followed for 6 months. The study group in which the EDOF lens was implanted consisted of 70 eyes in 35 patients. The control groups consisted of: 52 eyes in 26 patients in whom a multifocal was implanted and 52 eyes in 26 patients with implanted monofocal lens. After a total of 2 weeks, 2 months and 6 months post-surgery the following were evaluated: uncorrected and corrected visual acuity at 4 m, 80 cm, 40 cm, manifest refraction expressed as mean refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE), contrast sensitivity, intraocular pressure. A questionnaire on independence from ocular correction, the occurrence of photic phenomena, and patient satisfaction was also completed. Results: Monocular and binocular visual acuity and MRSE 6 months after the procedure were compared between three groups. All of the main analyses, except for comparisons of uncorrected distance visual acuity (both monocular and binocular) level, were significant. Contrast sensitivity was lower among patients with multifocal lens than among patients with EDOF lens. Halo and glare after 6 months were seen more often among patients with multifocal lens than among patients with the other lens (65% of eyes with multifocal lens vs. 6% of eyes with EDOF lens and 0% of eyes with monofocal lens). Glasses were needed by 35% of patients with EDOF lens, and by 96% of patients with monofocal lens and in none of the patients with multifocal lens. Conclusions: Most patients qualify for the implantation of a non-diffractive EDOF lens. Post-operative visual acuity improves at any distance. The best monocular visual acuity for intermediate distances is provided by an EDOF lens, and for near distance by a multifocal lens. The EDOF lens definitely increases independence from spectacle correction compared to monofocal lenses; however, the greatest degree of independence from spectacles is provided by multifocal lenses. The incidence of photic phenomena is slightly higher than that of a monofocal lens, and much lower for a multifocal lens.

Evaluating Optical Quality of a New Hydrophilic Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lens and Comparison to the Monofocal Counterpart: An Optical Bench Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to analyze the optical properties of a new hydrophilic enhanced monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) using optical bench analysis and compare it with its monofocal counterpart.

METHODS

This laboratory study investigates the enhanced monofocal intraocular lens (L-333) and the monofocal counterpart (L-313) IOL by Teleon Surgical, Spankeren, Netherlands on the optical bench, using OptiSpheric IOL PRO2 (Trioptics, Germany) in order to assess the optical quality according to ISO 11979 with ISO-2 Cornea. IOLs (power 22.0 D) were evaluated regarding through frequency modulation transfer function (MTF), Strehl ratio (SR), and through focus MTF at 50 lp/mm using a 3.0-mm and a 4.5-mm aperture. Tilt and decentration were applied. In addition, wavefront measurements were obtained using WaveMaster® IOL 2 device (Trioptics, Germany) and analyzed.

RESULTS

Centered: The MTF (mean) at 50 lp/mm (L-333/L-313) with 3.0 mm aperture was 0.606/0.724 and with 4.5 mm aperture 0.330/0.409. The SR (mean) with 3.0 mm aperture was 0.586/0.809 and with 4.5 mm aperture 0.330/0.348. Decentered by 1 mm: The MTF (mean) at 50 lp/mm (L-333/L-313) with 3.0 mm aperture was 0.485/0.705 and with 4.5 mm aperture 0.255/0.374. The SR (mean) with 3.0 mm aperture was 0.457/0.739 and with 4.5 mm aperture 0.185/0.268. Tilted by 5 degrees: The MTF (mean) at 50 lp/mm (L-333/L-313) with 3.0 mm aperture was 0.577/0.657 and with 4.5 mm aperture 0.345/0.336. The SR (mean) with 3.0 mm aperture was 0.583/0.702 and with 4.5 mm aperture 0.269/0.237. In through focus MTF and aperture of 3.0 mm, the L-333 showed a peak of 0.41 with some enlarged depth of power of about 2 D. For the aperture of 4.5 mm, the MTF values of L-313 and L-333 were slightly reduced; L-333 showed an MTF peak of 0.23 and some reduced depth of power of about 1.5 D. Wavefront measurements showed no major aberrations for the L-313, while a combination of moderate increase in Z 4-0 and Z 6-0 with opposite sign was revealed for the L-333.

CONCLUSION

The enhanced monofocal Lentis Quantum (L-333) produces some enlarged depth of focus by combining spherical aberration of different order and opposite sign. The Lentis Quantum performs very well in comparison to the aspherical monofocal counterpart owing to its optical design. Results with large apertures were sufficient too, suggesting that  the lens is a good option in eyes with a wide pupil and thus in refractive surgeries of young patients.

Far and Near Contrast Sensitivity and Quality of Vision with Six Presbyopia Correcting Intraocular Lenses

The objective of this prospective, randomized, double-masked study was to compare the contrast sensitivity and quality of vision of patients bilaterally implanted with the following six different presbyopia correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs): SV25T0 (n = 19), ATLISA 809M (n = 18), ATLISA TRI 839MP (n = 19), ZKB00 (n = 20), ZLB00 (n = 20) and Symfony ZXR00 (n = 20). For comparison purposes, 36 patients were implanted with a monofocal lens (ZA9003). Contrast sensitivity was assessed binocularly at distance under photopic, mesopic and mesopic plus glare conditions, and at near under photopic conditions. Quality of vision was explored in terms of photic phenomena and spectacle independence. Overall, the monofocal lens offered better contrast sensitivity, under all illumination conditions, and less occurrence and intensity of photic phenomena. Amongst the multifocal IOL (MIOL) designs, the extended depth of focus Symfony ZXR00 provided better contrast sensitivity than the other MIOLs, particularly at intermediate and high spatial frequencies. Up to 40% and 50% of patients implanted with MIOLs reported glare and halos, respectively. The SV25T0 resulted in less occurrence and intensity of halos. The evaluation of photic phenomena and contrast sensitivity under different illumination conditions may reflect real-life, visually challenging situations, and thus provide insightful information to assist ophthalmic surgeons when selecting the best intraocular lens for their patients.

Evaluation of a Novel Non-Diffractive Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens - First Results from a Prospective Study

PURPOSE

To evaluate a novel hydrophobic, non-diffractive, extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) design in comparison to two monofocal aspheric lenses.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria for this prospective, monocentric cohort study were opacification of the crystalline lens and patients' wishes for surgery. In the case of the EDOF IOL, patients asked for a presbyopia correction. All patients received surgery on both eyes. Corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity (CDVA, UCDVA), uncorrected and distance corrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA, DCIVA) and defocus curves (all monocular and binocular) were compared three months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Fifty-six eyes were implanted with an EDOF IOL (LuxSmart^TM, Bausch & Lomb GmbH, Berlin, Germany), 50 eyes with a monofocal aspheric IOL: 32 eyes with a clear IOL (Polylens^® AS 61, Polytech Domilens, Roßdorf, Germany), 16 eyes with a yellow IOL (iSert^® 251, Hoya Surgical Optics GmbH, Frankfurt, Germany). Three months postoperatively, UCDVA was comparable with the EDOF IOL, versus the monofocal IOL (P > 0.9). Binocular DCIVA in the EDOF IOL was significantly higher than in the monofocal IOL (P = 0.001). Monocular DCIVA better than 20/23 Snellen was achieved in 10% with the monofocal IOL and in 68% (P < 0.0001) with the EDOF IOL. Defocus curves showed a depth of focus at 20/23 Snellen of 1.6 vs. 0.83 diopters (D) in the EDOF IOL, vs. the monofocal IOL. No patient reported halos or starbursts in non-standardized questioning.

CONCLUSION

This non-diffractive EDOF IOL provided comparably high UCDVA and significantly higher DCIVA than the mono-focal lenses, causing only mild optical phenomena.

Comparative Analysis of the Clinical Outcomes of Mix-and-Match Implantation of an Extended Depth-of-Focus and a Diffractive Bifocal Intraocular Lens

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes of the extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens (EDOF-IOL) and the diffractive bifocal IOL.

METHODS

Fifty-six eyes of 28 patients underwent cataract surgery with implantation of an EDOF-IOL (TECNIS Symfony, ZXR00) in their dominant eye and a diffractive bifocal IOL (+3.25 D add TECNIS ZLB00) in their nondominant eye. Monocular and binocular uncorrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuity, defocus curves, contrast sensitivity, patient satisfaction score (0-5), and spectacle dependence at near vision were evaluated at 3 months after the surgery.

RESULTS

Postoperative binocular uncorrected distant visual acuity was 0.009±0.031 logMAR, uncorrected intermediate visual acuity was 0.090±0.158 logMAR, and uncorrected near visual acuity was 0.099±0.068 logMAR. The monocular defocus curve demonstrated better performance at intermediate distance in eyes with an EDOF-IOL and better performance at near distance in eyes with a diffractive bifocal IOL. An EDOF-IOL exhibited better outcomes in contrast sensitivity compared with a diffractive bifocal IOL. Three patients (10.7%) required glasses for near vision.

CONCLUSION

Mix-and-match implantation of a diffractive bifocal IOL with an EDOF-IOL provides an excellent range of vision, and high levels of contrast sensitivity and patient satisfaction.

Visual Outcomes after Implantation of Lucidis EDOF IOL

Purpose. To evaluate the visual performance and clinical outcomes after implantation of Lucidis EDOF IOL following cataract surgery. Design. In this retrospective study, medical records from all enrolled patients were analyzed, and the following information was extracted retrospectively over 3 months following surgery. Materials and Methods. We reviewed retrospectively 181 eyes of 98 patients, who underwent cataract surgery with Lucidis extended depth of focus IOL. Results. 44 patients were males (45%) and 54 were females (55%). The average age of the study population was 68 ± 11 years. The mean preoperative BCVA (logMAR) was 0.19 ± 0.18. The mean root mean square (RMS) high order aberration (HOA) was 0.18 ± 0.1. Monocular BCVA results were 0.02 ± 0.04 (logMAR) and 0.028 ± 0.04 (logMAR) 1 month and 3 months postoperatively, respectively. Between the baseline and 1-month measures, monocular distance BCVA improved by an average of 0.17 ± 0.14 logMAR ( $p$  = 0.0001). Between the baseline and 3-month postoperative measures, monocular distance BCVA improved by an average of 0.16 ± 0.13 logMAR ( $p$  = 0.0001). Monocular UDVA 1 and 3 months postoperatively was 0.08 ± 0.1 logMAR and 0.067 ± 0.08 logMAR, respectively. 1-Month postoperative binocular UDVA was 0.036 ± 0.05 logMAR, binocular UIVA was 0.1 ± 0.08 logMAR, and binocular UNVA was 0.12 ± 0.14 logMAR. 3-Month postoperative binocular UDVA was 0.038 ± 0.05 logMAR, binocular UIVA was 0.09 ± 0.1 logMAR, and binocular UNVA was 0.16 ± 0.14 logMAR. Conclusions. Lucidis EDOF IOL achieves good visual performances in all distances.

Visual and optical quality of enhanced intermediate monofocal versus standard monofocal intraocular lens

Purpose

Intraocular lens designs are constantly evolving, trying to obtain more spectacle independence after cataract surgery. This advantage can be linked to some disadvantages, such as optical quality decrease. For that reason, it is important to assess, not only the amount of vision provided but also the quality of vision once they are implanted. The purpose of the present work was to compare the visual performance between two monofocal intraocular models: a standard model and a monofocal with enhanced intermediate vision lens.

Methods

Prospective, randomized, comparative study. Sixty adult subjects scheduled to undergo bilateral cataract surgery and IOL implantation were randomized to receive one of the two IOLs in both eyes at Miranza IOA, Madrid, Spain (group A: monofocal with enhanced intermediate vision lens and group B: standard monofocal lens). Monocular outcomes (right eyes) determined 1 and 3 months postoperatively were photopic corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), perceived halo, corrected intermediate-distance contrast sensitivity, and higher-order aberrations. The impact of the new IOL in the postoperative management with autorefraction devices was also evaluated.

Results

No differences were found in CDVA between the two groups. Significant differences were detected between the two lenses evaluated in both total HOA (p = 0.028) and internal HOA (p = 0.037). Contrast sensitivity and halometry results obtained at 1 month were similar across the two IOL groups.

Conclusion

In patients undergoing cataract surgery, monofocal with enhanced intermediate vision IOL offered similar distance performance and contrast sensitivity along with perceived HOA and halos compared with the standard monofocal IOLs tested.

Clinical Performance of Extended Depth of Focus (EDOF) Intraocular Lenses – A Retrospective Comparative Study of Mini Well Ready and Symfony

Purpose

Extended depth of focus intraocular (EDOF) IOLs form a bridge between single- and multifocal IOL design. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes obtained after implanting two different optical designs of EDOF IOLs: the Mini Well Ready (SIFI Medtech, Catania, Italy) and Tecnis Symfony (Abbott Laboratories, Illinois, USA).

Methods

The retrospective observational study included 61 patients (122 eyes) who underwent bilateral implantation of the Mini Well Ready IOL (32 patients) or the Tecnis Symfony IOL (29 patients). The following preoperative and postoperative parameters were evaluated: spherical equivalent, anterior astigmatism, pupil size, monocular and binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), monocular and binocular uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA), monocular and binocular uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) and distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA). In the 6 months postoperative period, defocus curve, contrast sensitivity, photopic phenomena, and posterior capsule opacification were assessed.

Results

The patients receiving the Tecnis Symfony had slightly better monocular and binocular UDVA and CDVA than with the Mini Well Ready IOL, the differences were not statistically significant. Whereas the UIVA, DCIVA, UNVA, DCNVA, UNVA and DCNVA values were higher in the Mini Well Ready group, the differences were not significant. There were no significant between-group differences regarding the defocus curve for the vast majority of tested vergences. Dysphotopsias postoperatively were assessed at 6 months.

Conclusion

Patients receiving both the Mini Well Ready and Symfony IOLs had excellent visual acuity outcomes and spectacle independence.

Vergleich der Sehleistung mit monofokalen Intraokularlinsen mit und ohne verbesserte optische Eigenschaften in einem Nachtfahrsimulator: eine Proof-of-Concept-Studie

Hintergrund Ziel dieser Studie war die Einführung einer Methode zum „Benchmarking“ von Intraokularlinsen beim Autofahren, insbesondere im Hinblick auf die Sehschärfe (visual acuity, VA) und die Kontrastempfindlichkeit (contrast sensitivity, CS). Dazu wurden Patienten mit IOL-Implantaten: ICB00 (Tecnis Eyhance, Johnson & Johnson, Santa Ana, CA, USA) vs. CNA0T0 (Clareon, Alcon Laboratories Inc., Fort Worth, TX, USA) klinisch und in einem Nachtfahrsimulator untersucht.

Patienten und Methoden Klinische Tests zum Fernvisus bei hohem (high contrast visual acuity, HCVA) und niedrigem Kontrast (low contrast visual acuity, LCVA) sowie zur mesopischen CS wurden bei Probanden mindestens 2 Monate nach einer binokularen IOL-Operation durchgeführt (Einschlusskriterien: Visus > 20/25, ophthalmologisch normal, außer Kataraktoperation). Alle Patienten fuhren im Simulator eine gerade Strecke ab. Die VA, CS und Halogröße wurden binokular während des nächtlichen Autofahrens mit Landolt-Ringen in 4 verschiedenen (Fern- und Intermediärbereichs-)Positionen und Entfernungen gemessen.

Ergebnisse Die Ergebnisse werden als Median/Interquartilsbereich angegeben: ICB00-Daten (CNA0T0-Daten): 5 (6) Probanden im Alter von 69,6/8,3 (71,1/13,0) Jahren wurden eingeschlossen. Klinische Tests: logMAR HCVA 0,11/0,39 (0,00/0,51), logMAR LCVA 0,78/0,52 (0,80/0,54); logCS ohne 0,50/0,31 (0,30/0,65), mit Blendung 0,20/0,15 (0,20/0,5). Fahrsimulator bei Nacht: Die logMAR-VA-Schwellenwerte für die rechte Straßenseite, das Armaturenbrett, den Navigationsbildschirm und den Innenrückspiegel betrugen 0,50/0,06 (0,57/0,22), 0,81/0,07 (0,91/0,14), 0,80/0,17 (0,92/0,27), 0,50/0,11 (0,63/0,26), logCS-Schwellenwerte 1,53/0,67 (1,00/0,81), 0,82/0,11 (0,61/0,19), 0,71/0,14 (0,50/0,15), 0,87/0,07 (0,81/0,11). Größe des Halos: 5,40°/0,89° (5,88°/2,00°).

Schlussfolgerungen In einem Nachtfahrsimulator übertraf die ICB00-IOL die CNA0T0-IOL in Bezug auf logMAR (VA) und logCS um 0,1 log-Einheiten im Intermediärbereich. Klinische Tests für Ferne und Nähe ergaben keinen Unterschied. Dies könnte darauf hindeuten, dass Fahrsimulatorexperimente im Hinblick auf die Leistungsprüfung von IOLs – insbesondere auch im Intermediärbereich – sinnvolle Zusatzinformationen liefern können.

A Novel Intraocular Lens Simulator that Allows Patients to Experience the World Through Multifocal Intraocular Lenses Before Surgeries

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the intraocular lens (IOL) simulator can simulate how the world appears to patients with multifocal IOLs by allowing the patients to see far and near objects through the IOL simulator.

Methods

Twenty eyes from 20 patients (age = 50-70 years old) were included in the study. The IOL simulator we developed consists of a trial lens frame adapter, a lens tube, a concave lens, a spacer, a wet cell, and an IOL. We used two IOLs: Tecnis monofocal and Tecnis bifocal IOL (add +3.25 diopter [D]). Patients wore a trial lens frame with an IOL simulator on distant corrected trial lenses and underwent the following tests: defocus curve, satisfaction with distance and near vision, halo around the light, and near point accommodation (NPA). To check how the world appears to the patients through this simulator, a machine vision lens and a scientific camera were attached to the simulator, and far and near objects were photographed.

Results

In the defocus curve of multifocal IOL, the visual acuity showed the second peak at -4 D. Compared to monofocal IOL, satisfaction with distant vision was slightly worse, more halos were felt, satisfaction with near vision was higher, and the NPA was shorter in multifocal IOL. In the scientific camera test, through the multifocal IOL, the waiting room was blurry, the halo around the ceiling light was prominent, and the characteristics on the near visual acuity chart were clear.

Conclusion

Subjects could experience the functions of multifocal IOLs with our newly developed IOL simulator.

Translational Relevance

This IOL simulator using geometric optics allows patients to experience the function of multifocal IOLs before cataract surgery.

Presbyopia correction after previous Intracor treatment: Combined implantation of a small-aperture and a non-diffractive extended-depth-of-focus lens

PURPOSE

We present the case of implantation of two different Extended depth of focus intraocular lenses (EDoF IOLs) in a patient with a history of unilateral intrastromal femtosecond laser treatment for presbyopia correction (Intracor).

OBSERVATIONS

The patient reported decreasing visual acuity at near distance and increasing spectacle dependence. Ten years earlier, he had Intracor treatment for presbyopia correction in his left eye. Corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was 0.08 logMAR for the right eye and 0.16 logMAR for the left eye. Apart from dysfunctional lens syndrome, the examination results were unremarkable. Phacoemulsification and subsequent IOL implantation was performed in both eyes. The left eye was implanted with an IC-8 (AcuFocus, Irvine, CA, USA), whereas the fellow eye was implanted with an AcrySof IQ Vivity IOL (Alcon, Fort Worth, TX, USA). Postoperatively, CDVA improved to 0.02 and 0.04 logMAR for the right and left eye. Uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) was 0.24 logMAR for the right eye and -0.04 logMAR for the left eye, binocular UIVA was -0.04 logMAR. The patient reported a low level of photic phenomena and spectacle independence for far and intermediate distance.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPORTANCE

Combined implantation of a non-diffractive and a small-aperture EDoF lens after previous unilateral Intracor treatment could successfully improve visual acuity at far and intermediate distance.

Traumatic cataract in a young patient with myopia

A 36-year-old man was referred to our clinic because of traumatic cataract in his right eye, which had developed after being hit in the eye with a badminton shuttle as a child. He noticed that his vision in his right eye was gradually becoming worse. His refraction, corrected with spectacles, was -4.25 -2.00 × 115 in his right eye and -5.50 -1.50 × 57 in his left eye, with a corrected distance visual acuity of 20/32 and 20/20, respectively. Because of allergies, the patient never tolerated contact lens wear for more than 2 hours. On a slitlamp examination, we confirmed anterior subcapsular star-like cataract without any signs of zonulolysis. Optical biometry showed an axial length of 25.73 mm and 26.66 mm and an anterior chamber depth of 3.70 mm and 3.78 mm in the right and left eyes. Keratometric astigmatism measured by optical biometry was 1.56 diopters (D) at 30 degrees and 1.12 D at 138 degrees for the right and left eyes, and Scheimpflug tomography showed 1.1 D of regular astigmatism at 33 degrees in the right eye, and 0.9 D of regular astigmatism at 130 degrees in the left eye. The patient is a professional photographer and asked for a treatment that would still allow him to be able to perform his job: he wants to read all the buttons on the camera up close and focus on the scenery in the distance. What is your advice on this challenging case?

Comparison of Patient Outcomes following Implantation of Trifocal and Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose

The purpose is to compare the outcomes of implantation of trifocal intraocular lenses (TIOLs) and extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses (IOLs).

Methods

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrial.gov was conducted in March 2020 to identify relevant studies. A meta-analysis of the results was performed. Patients implanted with EDOF IOLs or TIOLs in previous studies were included. The primary outcomes of the study were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), and defocus curve.

Results

TIOLs and EDOF IOLs provided comparable binocular UDVA (MD = -0.01, 95% CI: -0.04, 0.03, logMAR). However, EDOF IOLs provided better UIVA (MD: -0.08, 95% CI: -0.14, -0.01, logMAR) and worse UNVA (MD: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.06, 0.14, logMAR) than TIOLs. Fewer patients achieved spectacle independence after implantation of EDOF IOLs (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.63, 0.87) than after implantation of TIOLs, especially for near vision (RR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68, 0.99). There was no statistically significant difference in contrast sensitivity (CS) under photopic or mesopic conditions with both IOLs. Patient satisfaction after implantation of both IOLs was high.

Conclusion

EDOF IOLs and TIOLs provide comparable distance vision. However, EDOF IOLs provide better intermediate vision and worse near vision than TIOLs. The advantages of EDOF IOLs over TIOLs in terms of CS, aberrations, and visual disturbance are not significant. Patients are satisfied with both types of IOLs.

[Pseudo-accommodative intraocular lenses]

This article reviews pseudo-accommodative intraocular lenses (IOLs), providing an analysis of the terminology used in this field of ophthalmology and describing the design of modern IOLs, the technological features used to achieve pseudo-accommodation that meets the needs of patients, particularly the new extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL technology. The article presents the main types of extended depth of focus IOLs, their description, advantages and disadvantages, as well as comparison with multifocal and monofocal IOLs based on clinical studies conducted in different countries.

Effect of minimonovision in bilateral implantation of a novel non-diffractive extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens: Defocus curves, visual outcomes, and quality of life

PURPOSE

To evaluate overall patient satisfaction, spectacle independence, visual acuity, and prevalence of optical phenomena following bilateral implantation of a new non-diffractive extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens targeted for minimonovision.

METHODS

Multicenter prospective case series. Postoperative far and near visual acuity at 3 months and patient quality of life by NEI-VFQ-25 questionnaire were assessed. Postoperative evaluation included defocus curves analysis, spectacle independence assessment, and recording of photic phenomena.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 97 eyes of 59 patients that underwent femtosecond-assisted cataract surgery with AcrySof IQ Vivity intraocular lens implantation. Thirty subjects (60 eyes) were eligible for analysis. After 3 months, postoperative achieved binocular uncorrected visual acuity was -0.03  ±  0.06 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution for distance, 0.06  ±  0.06 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution for intermediate, and 0.19  ±  0.03 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution for near. Defocus curve showed a smooth profile with no abrupt decrease of visual acuity. Minimonovision significantly improved visual acuity compared to when minimonovision was neutralized, for values of defocus curves from -1 to -3 D (p < 0.05). Twenty-six (87%) patients reported complete spectacle independence. High levels of satisfaction for distance and near vision resulted at VFQ-25 questionnaire. Only two patients complained of halos (6.7%) and one of them also of glare (3.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Implantation of this new non-diffractive extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens with minimonovision resulted in satisfying far, intermediate, and near visual acuity with a consistent reduction of spectacle dependence and improvement in patient's quality of life.

Citation network analysis of the various types of multifocal intraocular lenses

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The implantation of multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) has increased in recent years, allowing patients to achieve good quality vision at all distances, independence from use of glasses, and consequently, an increase in quality of life. The main purpose of this study was to analyse the links between publications and authors via citation networks, as well to as identify the different research areas and determine the most cited publications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The publication search was performed through the Web of Science database, using the terms «Multifocal intraocular lens», «Bifocal intraocular lens», «Trifocal intraocular lens», «Diffractive intraocular lens», «Refractive intraocular lens», «Accommodative intraocular lens» and «Extended depth of focus intraocular lens», for a time interval from 1989 to August 2020. The software used to analyse the publications was the Citation Network Explorer.

RESULTS

A total of 1293 publications were found, with 11,730 citations generated in the network, and 2019 had the highest number of publications of any year. The most cited publication was «European multicenter study of the AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive intraocular lens» by Kohnen et al., published in 2006. Four groups about different research areas in this field were found using the Clustering functionality: visual quality, IOL designs, ocular aberrations, or defocus curves.

CONCLUSIONS

The citation network offers an objective and comprehensive analysis of the main articles on the different designs and classes of multifocal IOL.

Non-diffractive wavefront shaping extended depth of focus (EDoF) intraocular lens: visual performance and patient-reported outcome

PURPOSE

To evaluate visual performance and patient-reported outcomes after bilateral implantation of new non-diffractive wavefront shaping extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL).

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany.

DESIGN

Prospective, single-arm, single-center study.

METHODS

Patient population: We included 16 patients (32 eyes) who received bilateral implantation of a non-diffractive wavefront shaping EDOF IOL (AcrySof® IQ Vivity®, Alcon Research, TX, USA). Target refraction in both eyes was emmetropia. Observation procedure: Monocular and binocular uncorrected (UCVA) and distance-corrected (DCVA) visual acuity (VA), refractive outcome, defocus curve, contrast sensitivity (CS) were evaluated 3 months after surgery with a questionnaire on optical phenomena and spectacle independence. Main Outcome measure: Three months postoperative monocular and binocular UCVA and DCVA (logMAR); defocus curve; CS; and quality of vision (QoV) questionnaire results.

RESULTS

Mean spherical equivalent was -0.16 ± 0.37 D 3 month postoperatively. Binocular UDVA at distance, intermediate, and near was 0.01 ± 0.05 logMAR at 4m, 0.05 ± 0.05 logMAR at 80cm, 0.07 ± 0.06 logMAR at 66cm, and 0.25 ± 0.11 logMAR at 40cm, respectively. Despite some minor optical phenomena, 88% of patients would choose the same lens. 63% of patients reported no optical phenomena at all. Contrast sensitivity was 1.25 ± 0.41 logCS (photopic), 0.96 ± 0.24 logCS (mesopic) and 0.93 ± 0.24 (mesopic + glare).

CONCLUSIONS

This non-diffractive wavefront shaping EDOF IOL provides good VA at far and intermediate distance and functional near VA. It showed good QoV and CS, and high spectacle independence for distance and intermediate vision with significantly less optical phenomena than with other EDOF or MIOLs.

Clinical Outcomes of a New Hybrid Monofocal IOL With Extended Depth of Focus

PURPOSE

To evaluate a new extended depth of focus intraocular lens (IOL), the xact Mono-EDOF ME4 (Santen Pharmaceuticals), Conformitè Europëenne-marked as a monofocal IOL, which has four diffractive rings intended to enhance intermediate vision.

METHODS

Results are reported for 47 IOLs implanted in 28 patients who underwent cataract surgery and implantation of the xact Mono-EDOF ME4 IOL in one (9 patients) or both (19 patients) eyes. Postoperative follow-up examinations included visual acuity testing (monocular and binocular; uncorrected distance visual acuity [UDVA], corrected distance visual acuity [CDVA], uncorrected intermediate visual acuity [UIVA], distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity [DCIVA]), defocus curve and contrast sensitivity testing, and dysphotopsia evaluation.

RESULTS

Follow-up at 6 months postoperatively revealed a monocular UDVA of 0.08 ± 0.15 logMAR, binocular UDVA of -0.02 ± 0.09 logMAR, monocular CDVA of -0.07 ± 0.08 logMAR, binocular CDVA of -0.09 ± 0.09 logMAR, monocular UIVA (70 cm) of 0.18 ± 0.16 logMAR, binocular UIVA (70 cm) of 0.09 ± 0.12 logMAR, monocular DCIVA (70 cm) of 0.25 ± 0.14 logMAR, and binocular DCIVA (70 cm) of 0.13 ± 0.11 logMAR. Defocus curve testing demonstrated a functional defocus of 1.25 diopters at 0.20 logMAR for monocular and 1.50 diopters at 0.20 logMAR for binocular testing. The contrast sensitivity corresponded to the age-appropriate normal values. Patients reported low levels of halo and glare.

CONCLUSIONS

The xact Mono-EDOF ME4 IOL showed good functional results for far and intermediate distance visual acuity while inducing a low level of photic phenomena. [J Refract Surg. 2021;37(9):601-608.].

Extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses: power calculation and outcomes

The extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses (EDOF IOLs) represent one of the most exciting advancements in the field of lens surgery. EDOF IOLs promise an excellent visual experience, minimizing visual disturbances (ie, halos and glare) commonly associated with multifocal IOLs. The pros and cons of EDOF IOLs should be evaluated in comparison with other more traditional multifocal or monofocal IOLs. The aim of this review is to provide the most current information regarding EDOF IOLs for power calculating formulas, refractive outcomes, incidence of photic phenomena, and patient satisfaction.

Visual Performances of a New Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lens with a Refractive Design: A Prospective Study After Bilateral Implantation

Purpose

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the visual outcome of a new extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) after bilateral implantation. A qualitative and quantitative analysis was performed and data were compared with those given by other studies regarding multifocal IOLs, which have the same purpose of giving spectacle independence to the patients.

Methods

The study enrolled 40 eyes of 20 patients who underwent cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of an EDOF IOL (Evolve Soleko, Rome, Italy). The mean age was 74.5±9 years (range 59-83ys). Refractive outcomes and contrast sensitivity were evaluated preoperatively and at 6-month follow-up. We also examined reading speed, glare, halos, difficulties in the night driving, the requirement for spectacles, and overall satisfaction with vision. Two questionnaires were administered for this purpose.

Results

At 6 months, the percentage of eyes within ±0.50 diopters (D) from emmetropia was 82.5%. Of all patients, 90% were satisfied with their vision. The percentage of spectacle-free for near and distance vision patients was 70% and 95%, respectively. A postoperative binocular uncorrected 60cm intermediate visual acuity (UI60VA) of 0.2 logMAR or better was achieved in 92% of patients. Contrast sensitivity significantly improved postoperatively (p<0.001) and mean reading speed was good.

Conclusion

This new EDOF IOL seems to provide an effective alternative to patients who desire a spectacle-free lifestyle postoperatively. These lenses can supply a satisfactory distance, intermediate and near vision, and retain good contrast sensitivity, with most patients reporting excellent satisfaction.

Peripheral vision and hazard detection with average phakic and pseudophakic optical errors

The impact of peripheral optical errors induced by intraocular lenses was evaluated by simulating the average phakic and pseudophakic image qualities. An adaptive optics system was used to simulate the optical errors in 20° nasal and inferior visual field in phakic subjects. Peripheral resolution acuity, contrast sensitivity and hazard detection were evaluated. Pseudophakic errors typical for monofocal designs had a negative effect on resolution acuity and contrast sensitivity and the hazard detection task also showed increased false positive and misses and a longer reaction time compared to phakic optical errors. The induced peripheral pseudophakic optical errors affect the peripheral visual performance and thereby impact functional vision.

Unilateral implantation of a new non-diffractive extended range-of-vision IOL in a young patient with Curschmann-Steinert myotonic dystrophy

PURPOSE

We present the case of a 36-year old Curschmann-Steinert myotonic dystrophy patient with posterior subcapsular cataract that we treated with unilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus intraocular lens to address his wish for spectacle independence at far and intermediate distance.

OBSERVATIONS

The patient underwent phacoemulsification with subsequent implantation of the AcrySof IQ Vivity IOL (Alcon, Fort Worth, TX, USA) in his left eye. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) on the left eye increased from +0.40 logMAR preoperatively to -0.12 logMAR at 3 months postoperatively. At the three months follow-up distance corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA) at 80 cm distance was -0.08 logMAR and DCIVA at 66 cm distance was 0.14 logMAR for the left eye. The defocus curve showed a functional defocus of 2.0 diopters at 0.2 logMAR or better, corresponding to the extended depth of focus. Dysphotopsia evaluation with a Halo & Glare simulator (Eyeland-Design Network GmbH, Vreden, Germany) revealed a very low level of photic phenomena.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPORTANCE

Unilateral implantation of a new generation, non-diffractive extended depth of focus IOL was well tolerated and provided good functional results for far and intermediate distances. The patient reported a very low level of photic phenomena.

Clinical Outcomes With a New Continuous Range of Vision Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lens

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical outcomes including patient-reported outcome measures in a sample of eyes undergoing bilateral cataract surgery with implantation of a new model of presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL).

METHODS

This non-randomized prospective case series enrolled 206 eyes of 103 patients undergoing phacoemulsification cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of the TECNIS Synergy IOL (Johnson & Johnson Vision). High and low contrast visual acuity, refractive, defocus curve, and patient-reported visual performance (Catquest-9SF questionnaire) outcomes were evaluated during a 3-month follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 96.1% (99 of 103) and 91.3% (94 of 103) of patients achieved binocular postoperative uncorrected distance (UDVA) and near visual acuity (UNVA) of 0.00 logMAR (20/20), respectively. Mean postoperative mesopic UNVA for both eyes was 0.14 ± 0.03 logMAR. Likewise, mean binocular UDVA and UNVA were 0.00 ± 0.03 and 0.04 ± 0.02 logMAR. An almost flat mean defocus curve was obtained, with visual acuities between 0.00 and 0.10 logMAR for most defocus levels in both eyes. A reduction of contrast led to a limited but statistically significant change in UNVA in both eyes (P < .001). The Rasch calibrated scoring of item 2 and the Rasch calibrated mean score of the Catquest-9SF questionnaire increased significantly with surgery (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

This new presbyopia-correcting IOL provides a continuous range of functional focus, with a limited deterioration under mesopic conditions, which is perceived as a satisfactory outcome by the patient if proper patient selection is performed. [J Refract Surg. 2021;37(4):256-262.].

Effect of the kappa angle on depth of focus after implantation of the TECNIS Symfony intraocular lens

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical effect of TECNIS Symfony intraocular lens (IOL) implantation and identify the effect of kappa angle on the depth of focus (DOF) after implantation.

METHODS

This prospective clinical study included consecutive patients who underwent cataract surgery and TECNIS Symfony IOL implantation at the Daqing Oilfield General Hospital from January 2019 to September 2019. Patients were divided into three groups according to the preoperative kappa angle (r): A (0 < r ≤ 0.2), B (0.2 < r ≤ 0.4), and C (r > 0.4). Uncorrected visual acuity was performed preoperatively and at 7 days, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively. Synthetical optometry, higher-order aberrations, and defocus examinations were performed at 3 months postoperatively. Single-factor analysis of variance and Spearman correlation coefficient were used for data analysis.

RESULTS

The uncorrected visual acuity values of the three groups were significantly improved postoperatively, compared with preoperative values (p < 0.001). Three months postoperatively, the best-corrected visual acuity values of the three groups were 0.11 ± 0.02 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), 0.09 ± 0.03 logMAR, and 0.11 ± 0.03 logMAR, respectively. Spherical equivalent (SE) values were 0.37 ± 0.08 D, 0.41 ± 0.06 D, and 0.42 ± 0.06 D, respectively. Best-corrected visual acuity and SE did not significantly differ among the three groups (F = 1.254, p = 0.135; F = 0.849, p = 0.228). There was no significant difference in SE between the three groups (F = 1.658, p = 0.312). Moreover, higher-order aberrations did not significantly differ among the three groups (p > 0.05). The kappa angle was negatively correlated with the postoperative DOF (r = -4.341, p = 0.026). Three months postoperatively, 54.55% of patients exhibited DOF ≥ 3 D, while 92.42% of patients exhibited DOF ≥ 2 D. The ranges of DOF in the three groups were 3.18 ± 0.27 D, 2.83 ± 0.80 D, and 2.57 ± 0.89 D, respectively; the difference among the three groups was statistically significant (F = 5.689, p = 0.037).

CONCLUSION

Most patients achieved full-range vision after TECNIS Symfony IOL implantation, but the DOF narrowed for those with an excessively large kappa angle, which indicates a need for careful selection.

Clinical Outcomes with a Novel Extended Depth of Focus Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lens: Pilot Study

Purpose

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of cataract surgery with implantation of a novel model of extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL).

Methods

Pilot case series enrolling a total of 27 eyes of 16 patients (49 to 84 years) undergoing uncomplicated phacoemulsification cataract surgery with implantation of the EDOF IOL Synthesis PLUS (Cutting Edge, Montpellier, France). Near (UNVA, uncorrected near visual acuity; DCNVA, distance-corrected near visual acuity) and distance visual acuity (uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity, UDVA and CDVA), monocular defocus curve and refractive outcomes were evaluated during a 3-month follow-up.

Results

Mean postoperative UDVA, UNVA and DCNVA were 0.11±0.17, 0.14±0.22 and 0.37±0.36 logMAR, respectively. A total of 84.6%, 91.7%, and 96.3% of eyes achieved postoperative UDVA, UNVA and CDVA of 0.20 logMAR or better. A total of 78.6% of eyes achieved postoperative DCNVA of 0.30 logMAR or better. Mean postoperative spherical equivalent was −0.76±0.53 D. The distance-corrected visual acuity was maintained on average over a value of 0.30 logMAR for the range of defocus levels between +1.00 and −1.50 D.

Conclusion

The implantation of the Synthesis plus EDOF IOL after cataract surgery seems to provide functional levels of distance, intermediate and near visual acuity. The near visual performance with this new IOL might be significantly enhanced using a micro-monovision approach. The results of this pilot study should be confirmed in future clinical trials.

Extended depth-of-focus technology in intraocular lenses

The extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) is an emerging technology that is designed to improve range of vision, especially at intermediate distances. In this review, we describe the clinical performance of 4 emerging EDOF IOL technologies; that is, small aperture, bioanalogic, diffractive optics, and nondiffractive optical manipulations. The American Academy of Ophthalmology generated a consensus statement for EDOF IOLs that provided benchmarks and recommendations for classifying an implant as an EDOF IOL as well as standardized testing criteria for evaluating performance. Although many types of EDOF technologies are being developed, there are important differences in their performance that require further testing and evaluation.

Assessment of the image quality of extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens models in polychromatic light

PURPOSE

The use of monochromatic light in the assessment of intraocular lenses (IOLs) has been criticized for not representing the real-world situation. This study aimed to measure and compare the image quality of 3 extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) IOL models in monochromatic and polychromatic light.

SETTING

David J Apple Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany.

DESIGN

In vitro study.

METHODS

An optical metrology instrument was used to study image quality metrics of diffractive IOLs with chromatic aberration correction (Symfony and AT Lara) and a refractive lens (Mini Well). The modulation transfer function (MTF) was measured in green and polychromatic light at a 2.0 mm, 3.0 mm, and 4.0 mm aperture. The EDOF IOL's tolerance to defocus was tested against a monofocal lens.

RESULTS

The mean MTF of the EDOF IOL at far distance was decreased in polychromatic compared with monochromatic light. The largest effect was found in the refractive lens; however, at intermediate distance, only small differences occurred. In their tolerance to defocus, the EDOF IOLs were superior to the monofocal IOL. The diffractive IOL had higher MTFs than that of the refractive IOL at 2 primary foci, the refractive IOL's optical quality varied less with defocus at 3.0 mm. The refractive lens was the most susceptible to changes in aperture size.

CONCLUSION

The diffractive EDOF IOL was more resistant to chromatic effects than the refractive IOL. The EDOF IOLs provided an extended through-focus performance compared with the monofocal IOL, but differences in optical design, particularly pupil dependency, should be considered when refining IOL selection for patients.

Extended Depth of Focus Versus Monofocal IOLs: Objective and Subjective Visual Outcomes

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the objective and subjective outcomes between bilateral implantation of the extended depth of focus (EDOF) Mini Well intraocular lens (IOL) and the aspheric monofocal Mini-4-Ready IOL (both SIFI S.p.A., Catania, Italy).

METHODS

This prospective comparative study included 25 patients (50 eyes) bilaterally implanted with an EDOF Mini Well IOL (EDOF group) and 25 patients (50 eyes) bilaterally implanted with a Mini-4-Ready IOL (monofocal group). Three-month follow-up data included corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity at 4 m and 80, 67, and 40 cm. Defocus curves, subjective and objective contrast sensitivity, and objective optical quality (modulation transfer function cutoff and Strehl ratio calculated with Optical Quality Analysis System [OQAS]; Visiometrics SL, Terrassa, Spain), halometry, and reading performance were measured. Subjective visual quality was evaluated based on National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument 42 (NEI RQL-42) scores.

RESULTS

Postoperative uncorrected and corrected monocular and binocular intermediate and near visual acuity was significantly better in the EDOF group (P < .001). No differences were observed for distance visual acuity (P ⩾ .312). Defocus curve outcomes for myopic values were better in the EDOF group (P < .001). No significant differences were found in hyperopic (obtained in steps of +0.50 diopters [D] from emmetropia to 1.50 D) values (P ⩾ .095), contrast sensitivity curves (P ⩾ .087), or OQAS outcomes (P ⩾ .138). Halometric values were significantly better in the monofocal group (P < .05). There was a correlation between mean keratometry values and intermediate/near visual acuity. Significantly better NEI RQL-42 subscale scores for near vision, far vision, activity limitations, glare, dependence on correction, and suboptimal correction were noted in the EDOF group (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Intermediate and near visual acuity was better after EDOF IOL than after aspheric monofocal IOL implantation while maintaining similar levels of visual quality, except for halo perception. [J Refract Surg. 2020;36(4):214-222.].

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.

Citation network analysis of the various types of multifocal intraocular lenses

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The implantation of multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) has increased in recent years, allowing patients to achieve good quality vision at all distances, independence from use of glasses, and consequently, an increase in quality of life. The main purpose of this study was to analyse the links between publications and authors via citation networks, as well to as identify the different research areas and determine the most cited publications.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The publication search was performed through the Web of Science database, using the terms «Multifocal intraocular lens», «Bifocal intraocular lens», «Trifocal intraocular lens», «Diffractive intraocular lens», «Refractive intraocular lens», «Accommodative intraocular lens» and «Extended depth of focus intraocular lens», for a time interval from 1989 to August 2020. The software used to analyse the publications was the Citation Network Explorer.

RESULTS

A total of 1293 publications were found, with 11730 citations generated in the network, and 2019 had the highest number of publications of any year. The most cited publication was «European multicenter study of the AcrySof ReSTOR apodized diffractive intraocular lens» by Kohnen et al., published in 2006. Four groups about different research areas in this field were found using the Clustering functionality: visual quality, IOL designs, ocular aberrations, or defocus curves.

CONCLUSIONS

The citation network offers an objective and comprehensive analysis of the main articles on the different designs and classes of multifocal IOL.