Preoperative Factors Affecting Visual Acuity Following the Implantation of Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

Visual Outcomes According to Age After Bilateral Implantation of Trifocal Intraocular Lenses

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of age on visual outcomes after the bilateral implantation of trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs).

METHODS

A total of 290 patients (580 eyes) who underwent bilateral implantation of a trifocal IOL were enrolled in this retrospective case-control study. Patients were divided into five age groups: 45 to 49, 50 to 54, 55 to 59, 60 to 64, and 65 years and older. Postoperative monocular uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA and CDVA, respectively), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), binocular distance-corrected defocus curve, spectacle dependence for near and distance vision, and patient satisfaction scores were compared among the five groups.

RESULTS

The 45 to 49 years group had significantly better mean UDVA (0.02 ± 0.05 logMAR) and UNVA (0.02 ± 0.04 logMAR) than the 65 years and older group (0.06 ± 0.09 and 0.09 ± 0.09 logMAR; P = .029 and P < .001; respectively). However, no significant differences were observed in the mean CDVA among the groups. Binocular visual performance of the 45 to 49 years group was better than that of the 65 years and older age group at defocuses of +1.00, +0.50, -1.00, and -3.00 D. No significant differences were observed in spectacle dependence for near and distance vision or in patient satisfaction scores among the five groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Bilateral implantation of trifocal IOLs can provide excellent near and distance vision in both young and older patients. However, UDVA and UNVA revealed considerably worse results in the older group, although no significant difference was observed in CDVA and postoperative refractive errors by age. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(4):e270-e277.].

Impact of posterior vitreous detachment on visual acuity after the implantation of a diffractive multifocal intraocular lens

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of posterior vitreous detachment (PVD) on visual acuity (VA) after implantation of a diffractive multifocal intraocular lens (mIOL).

SETTING

Eye Clinic, Okayama, Japan.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

This study evaluated 475 eyes of 475 patients who underwent cataract surgery with a TECNIS Multifocal ZLB00 lens implant between November 2017 and October 2019. Patient eyes were classified into the complete PVD group (PVD group) or the control group with no PVD/partial PVD (non-PVD group) and divided into 3 age categories: 65 to 69, 70 to 74, and 75 to 79 years. The postoperative VA of the PVD and non-PVD groups was compared between and within groups by age.

RESULTS

Distance-corrected near VA (DCNVA) was significantly worse in the PVD group than in the non-PVD group in all age categories ( P ≤ .029). In the PVD group, both corrected distance VA (CDVA) and DCNVA were significantly worse in the 75 to 79 years age group than in the 65 to 69 and 70 to 74 years age groups ( P ≤ .034). CDVA and DCNVA in the non-PVD group did not differ significantly between age categories.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that complete PVD worsens near VA in eyes with a diffractive mIOL. Furthermore, eyes with complete PVD may show an age-related decline in both CDVA and DCNVA. In particular, eyes ≥75 years of age with complete PVD have a poor visual prognosis and should be given careful consideration when deciding whether to implant a diffractive mIOL.

Association of refractive outcome with postoperative anterior chamber depth measured with 3 optical biometers

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the relationship between refractive outcomes and postoperative anterior chamber depth (ACD, measured from corneal epithelium to lens) measured by swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT), optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR), and Scheimpflug devices under the undilated pupil.

METHODS

Patients undergoing cataract phacoemulsification with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in a hospital setting were enrolled. Postoperative ACD (postACD) was performed with an SS-OCT device, an OLCR device, and a Scheimpflug device at least 1 month after cataract surgery. After adjusting the mean predicted error to 0, differences in refractive outcomes were calculated with the Olsen formula using actual postACD measured from 3 devices and predicted value.

RESULTS

Overall, this comparative case study included 69 eyes of 69 patients, and postACD measurements were successfully taken using all 3 devices. The postACD measured with the SS-OCT, OLCR, and Scheimpflug devices was 4.59 ± 0.30, 4.50 ± 0.30, and 4.54 ± 0.32 mm, respectively. Statistically significant differences in postACD were found among 3 devices (P < 0.001), with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman showing good agreement. No significant difference in median absolute error was found with the Olsen formula using actual postACD obtained with 3 devices. Percentage prediction errors were within ± 0.50 D in 65% (OLCR), 70% (Scheimpflug), and 67% (SS-OCT) calculated by actual postACD versus 64% by predicted value.

CONCLUSION

Substantial agreement was found in postACD measurements obtained from the SS-OCT, OLCR, and Scheimpflug devices, with a trend toward comparable refractive outcomes in the Olsen formula. Meanwhile, postACD measurements may be potentially superior for the additional enhancement of refractive outcomes.

Recommendation for Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: A Delphi Consensus Statement by the ESASO Study Group

PURPOSE

To establish consensus among experts in lens and refractive surgery to guide general ophthalmologists on issues related to presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs).

DESIGN

A modified Delphi method to reach a consensus among experts.

METHODS

A steering committee formulated 105 relevant items grouped into four sections (preoperative considerations, IOL selection, intraoperative considerations, and postoperative considerations). The consensus was defined as ≥ 70% of experts agreeing with the evaluation of a statement.

RESULTS

Ten experts participated and completed all rounds of questionnaires (100% response rate). Of 68 items considered in the preoperative considerations, consensus was achieved in 48 (70.6%). There was a lack of consensus over IOL selection, the experts only agreed on the importance of the patient's habits for the optical IOL design selection. Of the 14 considerations related to intraoperative issues, the experts reached a consensus on 10 (71.4%). The postoperative considerations section reached the highest consensus in 10 items of 13 (76.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Key recommendations for a diffractive multifocal IOL were a potential postoperative visual acuity > 0.5, a keratometry between 40-45 diopters, a pupil >2.8 mm under photopic conditions and <6.0 mm under scotopic conditions, a root mean square of higher order corneal aberrations <0.5 µm for 6-mm pupil size, while monofocal or non-diffractive IOLs should be considered for patients with coexisting eye disorders. A lack of agreement was found in the issues related to the IOL selection.

Comparison of visual outcomes after two types of mix-and-match implanted trifocal extended-depth-of-focus and trifocal intraocular lenses

PURPOSE

To compare visual outcomes between two types of mix-and-match implanted trifocal extended-depth-of-focus (EDoF) and trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs).

METHODS

A total of 212 eyes of 106 subjects with mix-and-match implanted FineVision Triumf and FineVision HP IOLs (Triumf-HP group) and 212 eyes of 106 subjects with mix-and-match implanted Zeiss AT LARA and AT LISA IOLs (AT LARA-LISA group) were enrolled in this retrospective case-control study. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), and binocular distance-corrected defocus curves were measured between 6 and 10 weeks after cataract surgery.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in UDVA among the four IOLs. UNVA was the best in eyes with the FineVision HP IOL (0.04 ± 0.06 logMAR), followed by eyes with the AT LISA IOL (0.07 ± 0.07 logMAR), the FineVision Triumf IOL (0.09 ± 0.09 logMAR), and the AT LARA IOL (0.11 ± 0.08 logMAR), respectively. The AT LARA-LISA group had better visual acuity than the Triumf-HP group between - 1.00 D and - 1.50 D of defocus, and the Triumf-HP group had better visual acuity than the AT LARA-LISA group between - 3.00 D and - 4.00 D of defocus.

CONCLUSION

Mix-and-match implantation of trifocal EDoF and trifocal IOLs provided good visual outcomes in far, intermediate, and near distances. The mix-and-match implantation of Triumf-HP IOLs led to better visual outcomes in near vision, while that of the AT LARA-LISA IOLs led to better visual outcomes in intermediate vision.