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

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).

IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research In Sight) Analysis of the Incidence of Monovision in Cataract Patients with Bilateral Monofocal Intraocular Lens Implantation

Purpose

To determine the incidence of pseudophakic monovision among patients bilaterally implanted with monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and to characterize the distribution of myopic offsets achieved.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective database study included data on patients receiving care from ophthalmologists who contributed to the Academy IRIS® (Intelligent Research In Sight) Registry. Anonymized data were collected, including patient age, ethnicity, procedure data (CPT code, date, laterality), and postoperative manifest refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE) in both eyes implanted with monofocal or monofocal toric IOLs. No data regarding IOL manufacturer, model, or power were collected. One primary outcome measure was the percentage of patients achieving monovision (defined as emmetropia within ±0.25 diopters [D] in one eye and a myopic offset of ≥0.50 D in the fellow eye) among all patients receiving bilateral monofocal IOLs at the time of cataract surgery between January 1, 2016, and September 1, 2019, with at least 90 days of follow-up. Other primary outcomes included the distribution and frequency of myopic offsets (anisometropia) between eyes.

Results

Of the 16,765 people receiving bilateral monofocal IOLs within the study period, 4796 (28.6%) achieved emmetropia in at least one eye, as defined by an MRSE within ± 0.25 D. The incidence of monovision among these patients was 34.2% (1638/4796). One-quarter (24.7%; 405/1638) of patients who achieved monovision had a myopic offset between 0.50 and 0.74 D, with more than one-third (35.2%; 576/1638) falling within 0.75-1.24 D and 18.0% within 1.25-1.74 D. A myopic offset ≥1.75 D was observed in 22.1% (362/1638) of patients who achieved monovision.

Conclusion

Pseudophakic monovision for presbyopia correction was achieved in ~34% of patients in the IRIS Registry bilaterally implanted with monofocal IOLs, with myopic offsets typically ranging from 0.5 to 1.24 D.

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

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

Patient reported outcomes after implementation of an enhanced depth of focus intraocular lens with low postoperative myopia

Background

Enhanced depth-of- focus intraocular lenses (EDOF IOL) have filled the gap between monofocal and multifocal intraocular implants with optical qualities of monofocal lenses and usually minor dysphotopsias typical for multifocal lenses. The purpose of this study was to evaluate visual outcomes after bilateral implantation of a new EDOF IOL in patients with requirements for perfect near and intermediate vision.

Methods

The study included 15 patients (29 eyes as one was amblyopic) with bilateral implantation of LUXSMART EDOF IOL (Bausch & Lomb) with a targeted myopia (between -0.25 and -0.50D) in both eyes. Monocular corrected and uncorrected visual acuity for far, intermediate and near as well as refractive outcomes were evaluated at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the surgery. Additionally, binocular visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and defocus curve were measured at the final follow-up visit. At 12 months' visit patients completed a questionnaire evaluating patient satisfaction, spectacle independence and presence of dysphotopsias.

Results

Binocular uncorrected visual acuities at 12 month's visit were 0.13 ​± ​0.16, 0.06 ​± ​0.08, 0.07 ​± ​0.09 and 0.15 ​± ​0.09 logMAR for far distance, 80 ​cm, 66 ​cm and 40 ​cm respectively. Corrected binocular visual acuities at 12 months were 0.00 ​± ​0.00, 0.05 ​± ​0.07, 0.05 ​± ​0.06, 0.13 ​± ​0.16 respectively for distance, 80 ​cm, 66 ​cm and 40 ​cm. Automated refraction spherical equivalent at 12 months' visit stood at -0.70 ​± ​0.48D, which was 0.46D less than calculated biometric target, however spherical equivalent of subjective refraction at 12 months equaled -0.49 ​± ​0.46D, which was closer to preoperative biometric target. Defocus curve had gentle shape without peaks typical for monofocal IOLs. Binocular contrast sensitivity results were superior to average results for that age group and equaled 1.78 ​± ​0.16 logMAR without correction and 1.81 ​± ​0.13 logMAR with correction. Spectacle independence for near and intermediate distances was achieved in all patients and for far distance in 73.3% of patients. Burdensome dysphotopsias were not reported in any case.

Conclusions

EDOF IOLs targeted bilaterally at low myopia can provide excellent near and intermediate visual acuity and independence of any optical correction in majority of cases. This approach can be used in selected patients who are focused on stationary activities.

Quality of vision and outcomes after bilateral implantation of pseudo-non diffracting beam IOL

Purpose

To analyze the objective and subjective visual performances of a new hybrid refractive/aspheric extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL).

Methods

In this monocentric prospective study patients with bilateral cataracts underwent cataract surgery and were implanted with a Lucidis IOL (SAV-IOL SA, Neuchâtel, Switzerland) in both eyes, 1 week apart from each other. At 3 months from implantation postoperative evaluations included monocular and binocular uncorrected and distance-corrected distant (4 m), intermediate (80 cm, 67 cm) and near (40 cm) visual acuities (UDVA/DCVA, UI80-67VA/DCI80-67VA, UNVA/DCNVA), binocular defocus curves, halometry, contrast sensitivity and objective quality-of-vision measurements. Also, patients were also asked to complete the national eye institute refractive error quality of life (NEI-RQL-42) questionnaire.

Results

Twenty-five patients (50 eyes) were included. The mean postoperative binocular UDVA, UI80VA, UI67VA and UNVA were-0.02 ± 0.13, 0.05 ± 0.09, 0.05 ± 0.08 and 0.03 ± 0.1 LogMar, and did not significantly differ from their corrected counterparts. On binocular defocus curves a VA ≥0.05LogMar was found between +0.50 and - 2.50 D of vergence, whereas the mean distance from the central stimulus on halometry was 1.23 ± 0.01. Mean ocular and corneal radical mean square at 4 mm were 0.31 ± 0.28 and 0.19 ± 0.07, respectively; whereas the mean Strehl ratio was 0.2 ± 0.09.

Conclusion

Lucidis IOLs demonstrated excellent visual performances, especially at close distances while maintain good quality of vision, contrast sensitivity, and overall patient-satisfaction.

Analysis of Daily Visual Habits in a Presbyopic Population

Purpose

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Astigmatism Tolerance and Visual Outcomes After Bilateral Implantation of a Hybrid Continuous Transitional Focus IOL

PURPOSE

To evaluate the astigmatism tolerance and the visual outcomes after implantation of a premium intraocular lens (IOL) with a continuous transitional focus (Precizon Presbyopic; Ophtec BV) in pseudophakic presbyopia correction.

METHODS

This prospective study enrolled 20 patients (40 eyes) after bilateral phacoemulsification and IOL implantation. Corrected and uncorrected visual acuities at 4 m and 80, 67, and 40 cm (CDVA, UDVA, DCI80VA, UI80VA, DCI67VA, UI67VA, DCNVA, and UNVA), astigmatic and spheric defocus curve, mean reading speed (MRS), critical print size (CPS), contrast sensitivity, optical aberrations (modulation transfer function [MTF] cut-off, Strehl ratio, and higher order aberration root mean square [HOA RMS]), objective halometry, and National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument 42 [NEI RQL-42] questionnaire were evaluated 3 months after surgery.

RESULTS

Astigmatic defocus curves revealed a tolerance up to -1.00 and +0.75 diopters (D) for with-the-rule astigmatism, and up to -1.00 and +1.00 D for against-the-rule astigmatism. Binocular spheric defocus curve showed that the mean visual acuity was greater than 0.15 logMAR from 1.00 to -1.00 D. MRS, CPS, MTF cut-off, Strehl ratio, and HOA RMS were 116.97 ± 21.94 words/min, 0.45 ± 0.06 logRDA, 20.03 ± 4.86 cycles/degree, 0.11 ± 0.07, and 0.28 ± 0.09, respectively. Contrast sensitivity was within the normal range for all tested light conditions. The NEI RQL-42 evidenced high subjective satisfaction for all subscales, especially for far vision, activity limitations, dependence on correction, suboptimal correction, appearance, and satisfaction with correction.

CONCLUSIONS

The Precizon Presbyopic IOL allows good astigmatism tolerance and both objective and subjective high quality of vision. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(1):33-39.].

Visual Outcomes and Optical Quality of Accommodative, Multifocal, Extended Depth-of-Focus, and Monofocal Intraocular Lenses in Presbyopia-Correcting Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

Importance

A bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) can help compare the various types of multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) used in clinical practice.

Objective

To compare outcomes of presbyopia-correcting IOLs frequently recommended in clinical practice through a bayesian NMA based on a systematic review.

Data Sources

Medline (PubMed) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched on May 15, 2021, from inception.

Study Selection

Based on the research question, randomized clinical trials assessing multifocal IOLs in patients who underwent bilateral cataract extraction were searched. Nonrandomized studies, studies in patients with unilateral or contralateral cataract extractions, duplicated studies, conference abstracts, and nonpeer-reviewed articles were excluded.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Descriptive statistics and outcomes were extracted. The NMA was conducted to compare different types of IOLs. The mean differences for continuous variables, odds ratios for binary variables, 95% credible intervals (CrIs), and ranks of interventions were estimated.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The outcomes examined included binocular visual acuities by distance and optical quality, including glare, halos, and spectacle independence.

Results

This NMA included 27 studies comprising 2605 patients. For uncorrected near visual acuity, trifocal IOLs (mean difference, -0.32 [95% CrI, -0.46 to -0.19]) and old bifocal diffractive IOLs (mean difference, -0.33 [95% CrI, -0.50 to -0.14]) afforded better visual acuity than monofocal IOLs. Regarding uncorrected intermediate visual acuity, extended depth-of-focus IOLs provided better visual acuity than monofocal IOLs. However, there were no differences between extended depth-of-focus and trifocal diffractive IOLs in pairwise comparisons. For uncorrected distant visual acuity, all multifocal IOLs were comparable with monofocal IOLs. There were no statistical differences between multifocal and monofocal IOLs regarding contrast sensitivity, glare, or halos.

Conclusions and Relevance

For patients considering a multifocal IOL due to presbyopia, bilateral implantation of a trifocal IOL might be an optimal option for patients without compromising distant visual acuity.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Supplementary Information

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

Refractive and Visual Outcomes After Implantation of a Secondary Sulcus Intraocular Lens with an Extended Depth of Focus

Purpose

To evaluate the range of vision, visual function, and quality of vision after implantation of a secondary extended depth of focus intraocular lens (EDOF IOL) implanted in the sulcus.

Setting

One clinical practice in Haugesund, Norway.

Design

Prospective single arm non-interventional study.

Methods

Eligible subjects presenting for surgery, or who had previous successful primary cataract or refractive lens exchange surgery in both eyes were subsequently implanted with the AddOn® secondary EDOF IOL in the sulcus. Manifest refraction and visual acuity at distance, intermediate and near were measured 3 months after surgery, along with the monocular defocus curve. Subjects also completed a visual function and a quality of vision questionnaire.

Results

The study included 32 eyes of 16 subjects. At 3 months postoperative, the mean refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) was −0.16 ± 0.30 D, with a residual cylinder of 0.29 ± 0.27 D. The mean monocular uncorrected VA was 0.1 logMAR (20/25) or better at all test distances. The monocular defocus curves showed a depth of focus of 2.0 D. For every category except reading fine print, all but one subject (94%) had no difficulty or little difficulty with near tasks. Glare and halos were the most common visual disturbances, with no reports of starbursts. There was no evidence of any intralenticular opacification in any of the eyes, and no evidence of iris chafing/depigmentation.

Conclusion

This secondary EDOF IOL provided excellent distance and intermediate vision, and very good near vision to subjects. Subject reported near visual function was also very good and visual disturbances were limited. This lens appears to be a good option for patients who would like to improve their range of vision. Results appear as good or better than those reported for primary EDOF lenses.

Difference in Quality of Vision Outcome among Extended Depth of Focus, Bifocal, and Monofocal Intraocular Lens Implantation

We aimed to compare the postoperative quality of vision among patients who received extended depth of focus (EDOF), bifocal, and monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. A retrospective study was conducted, and 87 patients who underwent cataract surgery were enrolled. Patients were categorized into different groups according to IOL design, with 24, 29, and 34 individuals constituting bifocal, EDOF, and monofocal groups. Preoperative and postoperative visual acuity (VA), biometry data, refractive status, contrast sensitivity (CS), higher-order aberrations (HOAs), and a quality of vision questionnaire that consisted of 11 questions were obtained 1 month postoperatively. The Kruskal−Wallis test and Pearson’s chi-square test were applied for statistical analyses. The postoperative CDVA was better in the EDOF group than in the bifocal group (p = 0.043), and the residual cylinder was lower in the EDOF groups than in the other two groups (both p < 0.05). The CS was worse in the EDOF group than in the other two groups (all p < 0.05), while the spherical aberration and trefoil were lower in the EDOF group than in the bifocal group (both p < 0.05). In terms of the quality of vision, the scores were better in the monofocal group than in the EDOF group in seven items (all p < 0.05), and the quality of vision in the bifocal group was better than in the EDOF group in small print reading (p = 0.042). In addition, the incidence of glare was lower in the monofocal group than in the other two groups (p < 0.001), while the spectacle dependence ratio was significantly higher in the monofocal group compared to the other two groups (p < 0.001). In conclusion, the general quality of vision was better in the monofocal group compared to the bifocal and EDOF groups, while the spectacle dependence ratio was significantly higher in the monofocal group than in the other two groups.

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.

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.

Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses Implantation in Eyes After Corneal Refractive Laser Surgery: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Purpose

To assess the efficacy, safety, and predictability of presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs) in cataract patients with previous corneal refractive surgery.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies evaluating the clinical outcomes of presbyopia-correcting IOLs implantation in cataract surgery after laser refractive surgery. Outcomes were efficacy, safety and predictability parameters.

Results

The authors identified 13 studies, involving a total of 128 patients and 445 eyes. Presbyopia-correcting IOLs were effective at improving distance, intermediate and near visual acuity aftercataract surgery. The proportion of post-laser surgery eyes with uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) ≥ 20/25 was 0.82 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.74-0.90] and the pooled rates of spectacle independence at near, intermediate, and far distances were 0.98 (95% CI, 0.94-1.00), 0.99 (95% CI, 0.95-1.00) and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.65-0.94) respectively. The percentage of participants who suffered from halos and glare was 0.40 (95% CI, 0.25-0.64) and 0.31 (95% CI, 0.16-0.60), respectively. The predictability had a percentage of 0.66 (95% CI, 0.57-0.75) and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85-0.96) of eyes within ±0.5 diopters (D) and ±1.0 D from the targeted spherical equivalent.

Conclusions

Presbyopia-correcting IOLs provide satisfactory results in terms of efficacy, safety and predictability in patients with previous corneal refractive surgery, but have a higher risk of photopic side effects such as halos and glare.

Extended Depth of Focus Versus Monofocal IOLs in Patients With High Myopia: Objective and Subjective Visual Outcomes

PURPOSE

To compare the objective and subjective outcomes between the extended depth of focus (EDOF) Mini Well intraocular lens (IOL) and the aspheric monofocal Mini-4-Ready IOL (both SIFI S.p.A.) in patients with high myopia.

METHODS

In this prospective comparative study, 40 patients with high myopia (axial length ≥ 26 mm) were enrolled: 20 patients were bilaterally implanted with the EDOF Mini Well IOL (EDOF group) and 20 patients were bilaterally implanted with the 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, objective optical quality (calculated with Optical Quality Analysis System; Visiometrics SL), halometry, and reading performance. Subjective visual quality was evaluated with National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument 42 scores.

RESULTS

All visual acuities were significantly better in the EDOF group (P ⩽ .04) except monocular and binocular uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuities for distance (P ≥ .50). Defocus curves for myopic and hyperopic values were better in the EDOF group (P ⩽ .05), apart from +0.50 to -0.50 D (P ≥ .16). Contrast sensitivity curves was worse in the EDOF group in the mesopic-with-glare condition (P ⩽ .04). No differences were found in halometric values (P ≥ .15) and OQAS outcomes (P ≥ .47). National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument 42 subscale scores were better for expectation, near vision, activity limitations, and dependence on correction in the EDOF group (P ⩽ .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Intermediate and near visual acuities were better in the EDOF group than in the monofocal group, with a comparable visual quality index between groups. [J Refract Surg. 2022;38(3):158-166.].

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.

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.

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.

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

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of three different types of trifocal diffractive intraocular lenses (IOLs).

SETTING

Hospital da Luz, Lisbon, Portugal.

DESIGN

Prospective comparative case series.

METHODS

180 eyes of 90 patients undergoing phacoemulsification cataract surgery with implantation of one of these trifocal IOLs were enrolled: Tecnis Synergy (J&J Vision) (Synergy group, 30 patients), Acrysof PanOptix (Alcon) (PanOptix group, 30 patients), and POD F (PhysIOL) (Finevision group, 30 patients). The outcomes in terms of distance, intermediate and near visual acuity (VA), refraction, defocus curve, photic phenomena and spectacle independence were evaluated at 3-months follow-up.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between groups in monocular distance-corrected intermediate (Synergy 0.04±0.11, PanOptix 0.05±0.09, Finevision 0.08±0.10; p=0.107) and near VA (0.01±0.08, 0.01±0.06, 0.04±0.10; p=0.186). Likewise, no significant differences among groups were found in binocular uncorrected distance (p=0.572), near (p=0.929) and intermediate VA (p=0.327). In contrast, significant differences between groups were found in the visual acuity for the vergence demands of -0.50, -1.00, -2.00, -3.50 and -4.00 D (p≤0.045). No significant differences among groups were found either in the frequency, severity and bothersomeness of different disturbing visual symptoms, including glare and haloes (p≥0.129). More than 96% of patients in all groups did not require the use of spectacles at any distance after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The three trifocal IOLs evaluated provide an effective visual rehabilitation with minimal incidence of photic phenomena. A trend to obtain a wider range of functional focus was observed with the Tecnis Synergy IOL.

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.

Optical and visual quality assessment of an extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens based on spherical aberration of different sign

PURPOSE

To assess the optical quality and the visual performance of patients implanted with an extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL).

METHODS

Thirty-eight eyes underwent implantation of the Mini WELL Ready EDOF IOL and were evaluated at 3-months postsurgery. Higher-order aberrations (HOAs) and modular transfer function (MTF) were measured at 3- and 5-mm pupils. Binocular uncorrected-distance visual acuity (UDVA) and corrected-distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected-distance intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) and corrected-distance intermediate visual acuity (CDIVA) at 80 cm, and uncorrected-distance near visual acuity (UNVA) and corrected-distance near visual acuity (CDNVA) at 40 cm were obtained. Postoperative refraction, binocular defocus curve, halometry and subjective ad hoc patients' questionnaire were also evaluated.

RESULTS

HOAs were 0.171 ± 0.046 µm and 0.406 ± 0.137 µm at 3 and 5 mm, respectively. MTFs decreased as the spatial frequency increased being comparable for both pupils. 92.10% of eyes were within ± 1.00D, and the mean postoperative spherical equivalent was - 0.25 ± 0.65D. Mean UDVA, UIVA and UNVA were 0.06 ± 0.12, 0.05 ± 0.10 and 0.26 ± 0.28 logMAR, respectively. Mean CDVA, CDIVA and CDNVA were - 0.01 ± 0.08, 0.06 ± 0.11 and 0.24 ± 0.12 logMAR, respectively. Defocus curve showed a continuous range of vision, especially at intermediate distances. Mean discrimination index was 0.79 ± 0.04. Questionnaire revealed that about 79% of patients reported a high or moderately high satisfaction with the procedure, and about 95% of patients would undergo the same procedure again.

CONCLUSIONS

The Mini WELL Ready EDOF IOL provided good optical and visual quality with high level of patient satisfaction and seems to be a valuable option to provide unaided vision at different distances minimizing visual disturbances.

Lens-based surgical correction of presbyopia. Where are we in 2020?

INTRODUCTION

Presbyopia is the progressive and irreversible loss of accommodation due to aging. It is one of the main causes of loss of quality of life in people from 45 years of age, due to the, often novel, dependence on spectacles. The eagerness to correct it by ophthalmologists impulsed by the desire of millions of people who suffer from it, has become one of the main drivers for the development of intraocular lens (IOL) technology over the last twenty years.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This review briefly presents the different alternatives that have allowed us to improve the crystalline lens surgical approach of presbyopia; from monofocal lenses and monovision technique, accommodative, refractive, and diffractive multifocal lenses, and finally the most recent extended depth of focus/field lenses known as EDOFs.

RESULTS

Each IOL has its advantages, limitations and disadvantages. Furthermore, there is no single lens that suits the needs of all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

It is necessary to know the variety of lenses available, and to have an in-depth understanding of their optical properties, as well as the impact that these will have later on their clinical performance and on the visual quality of the patients. This should help us to select the best alternative for each of them.