Retinal image quality through an operating microscope with wavefront shaping extended depth of focus intraocular lens in model eye

PURPOSE

To compare the quality of images of gratings placed in a model eye viewed through an extended depth of focus (EDoF) intraocular lens (IOL) to that of diffractive bifocal IOL or monofocal IOL.

DESIGN

Experimental laboratory investigation.

METHODS

Non-diffractive wavefront shaping EDoF (CNAET0, Alcon laboratories), echelette-designed EDoF (ZXR00V, Johnson & Johnson Vision), diffractive bifocal IOL with low power addition (SV25T, Alcon Laboratories), or monofocal IOL (CNA0T0, Alcon laboratories) was placed in a fluid-filled model eye. A USAF Resolution Grating Target was glued to the posterior surface of the model eye and viewed through a flat or a wide-angle contact lens. The contrast of the gratings viewed through the EDoF or multifocal IOLs was compared to that through the monofocal IOL. A wavefront analyzer was used to measure the spherical power of the central 4.5 mm optics of the EDoF, multifocal, and monofocal IOLs. The distribution of the dioptric power and the dioptric power map were compared.

RESULTS

The gratings observed through the flat contact lens with the CNAET0, ZXR00V, or SV25T were slightly blurred when viewed through the multifocal optics. The blurred area was in the circumferential area of the CNAET0, the central area of SV25T, and the peripheral area of ZXR00V. The mean contrast was 0.258±0.020 for CNAET0, 0.227±0.025 for ZXR00V, and 0.221±0.020 for SV25T for the 16.0 cyc/mm grating. The contrast was significantly lower for ZXR00V (P=0.004) and SV25T (P=0.004) than the 0.303±0.015 for CNA0T0 but the differences were not significant. For the wide-angle contact lens, the contrast for CNAET0 was 0.182±0.009, for ZXR00V was 0.162±0.011, and for SV25T was 0.163±0.007 for the 16.0 cyc/mm grating, and none was significantly different from the 0.188±0.012 for CNA0T0. The dioptric variations of the CNAET0 indicated a ring-shaped area of higher power corresponding to the circumferential blurred zone observed through the flat contact lens.

CONCLUSION

The wavefront shaping and echelette-designed EDoF-IOLs reduce the contrast of the grating more than the monofocal IOL when viewed through the flat contact lens. The degree of reduction depended on the design of the extended-focus optics. The difference was less through the wide-angle contact lens.

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.

Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lens Implantation in Patients with Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Pilot Study

Purpose

To assess visual outcomes of the implantation of a non-diffractive extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) in patients with age-related macular degeneration (AMD).

Setting

Ophthalmology practice, Sydney, Australia.

Design

Retrospective chart review.

Methods

Patients with AMD undergoing cataract surgery and receiving non-diffractive EDOF AcrySof IQ Vivity IOL implantation over a 2-year period were identified. Corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA; 50 cm), contrast sensitivity, central foveal thickness, VF-14 questionnaire results, and quality of life where available were analyzed.

Results

A total of 28 sequential patients (51 eyes) were included in this pilot study (46% male, mean age 77.4 years). Of 27 eyes that had late AMD, 17 (63%) had wet AMD. Mean patient preoperative CDVA was logMAR 0.32±0.29. Postoperative monocular CDVA and DCNVA were logMAR 0.20±0.25 and N9±5 (range N5-N36), respectively. Eyes achieving postoperative CDVA of Snellen 6/5-6/12 (n=42, 82%), 6/15-6/24 (n=7, 14%), and greater than 6/24 (n=2, 4%) achieved a mean DCNVA of N8 (range N5-N10), N13 (range N10-N18), and N27 (range N18-N36), respectively. Eyes achieving CDVA of Snellen 6/5-6/12 showed contrast sensitivity within the normal range. On postoperative VF-14 questionnaire, patients with CDVA of Snellen 6/5-6/12 reported minimal visual impairment, while patients with CDVA greater than 6/15 reported mild impairment. A majority of patients (96%, n=27) were satisfied with the improvement in quality of life postoperatively. No intraoperative complications were reported.

Conclusion

The EDOF AcrySof IQ Vivity IOL provides improved near vision proportional to distance vision in patients with early AMD.

Optical and Clinical Outcomes of an Isofocal Intraocular Lens vs. a Monofocal Standard Lens

The aim of this study is to evaluate the results obtained on the optical bench and clinically with an isofocal lens (ISOPure, BVI medical, Belgium) to compare them to a standard monofocal one (MicroPure, BVI medical, Belgium). To do so, we have combined laboratory investigation and a prospective, comparative, and randomized clinical study. First, we have measured the wavefront of the two models studied using a NIMO TR1504 (Lambda-X, Belgium) deflectometer for three nominal powers: +10.00, +20.00 and +30.00 D. In the randomized study with 48 patients, half of them implanted with ISOPure and the other with MicroPure, we have measured visual acuities and contrast sensitivity under photopic and mesopic conditions. The optical bench results show that the isofocal lens presented higher power than the monofocal one, at the lens center, due to the spherical aberration (coefficients Z(4,0), Z(6,0) and Z(8,0)) induced by the greater asphericity of its design. The addition obtained depended on the nominal power, from +1.00 to +1.50 D. The results of the clinical study showed that the ISOPure lens presented better visual outcomes, which were statistically significant, at intermediate distance compared to the MicroPure lens (p-values of 0.014 and 0.022 for 80 and 60 cm, respectively) without decreasing the contrast sensitivity. Clinical outcomes were not affected by pupillary size. In conclusion, due to the increase in power at the lens center due to its highly aspherical design, the isofocal lens evaluated showed better intermediate vision than the monofocal one.

The Novel Optical Design and Clinical Classification of a Wavefront-Shaping Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lens

Purpose

To evaluate the clinical rationale of wavefront-shaping technology, describe how intraocular lenses (IOLs) using wavefront-shaping technology are differentiated from refractive or diffractive optical presbyopia-correcting designs, and describe the mode of action of this technology.

Methods

Extended depth of focus (EDoF) IOLs are the latest class of presbyopia-correcting IOLs addressing the growing demand of patients for reduced spectacle dependence. These use various optical technologies, including diffractive designs (eg, TECNIS Symfony ZXR00 and AT LARA 29 MP) and non-diffractive designs such as small aperture (eg, IC-8 IOL and XtraFocus Pinhole Implant), spherical aberration (eg, MINI WELL Ready and LuxSmart), and wavefront shaping (eg, AcrySof IQ Vivity DFT015 and Clareon Vivity CNWET0). Despite some improvement in visual acuity at intermediate and near distances, these technologies can still be associated with increased rate of visual disturbances or poorer distance vision compared with monofocal IOLs. One way to overcome such limitations is using a wavefront-shaping optical principle.

Results

Clinical data show that wavefront-shaping technology results in a continuous EDoF compared with a monofocal IOL while exhibiting a minimal halo, similar to an aspheric monofocal IOL. Clinically, this translates to a lens that has proven to exceed the American National Standards Institute/American Academy of Ophthalmology criteria for an EDoF IOL.

Conclusion

The novel wavefront-shaping optic technology allows patients to achieve a continuous range of vision from distance to functional near with low levels of visual disturbances comparable with aspheric monofocal IOLs.

Comparison of the Polychromatic Image Quality of Two Refractive-Segmented and Two Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

Evaluating chromatic aberration for a multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) in vitro is essential for studying its performance because it helps determine the most appropriate lens for each patient, enhancing surgical outcomes. While refractive MIOLs with angular power variation have shown positive clinical outcomes, studies of these MIOLs on optical benches primarily employed monochromatic green light, neglecting the impact of longitudinal chromatic aberration (LCA) on MIOL performance. To address this gap, we evaluated the through-focus modulation transfer function (TF-MTF) and the point spread function (PSF) of two refractive segmented extended depth of focus intraocular lenses (IOLs) (Femtis Comfort and Precizon Presbyopic), comparing the results with those obtained with two widely known diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (AcrySof IQ ReSTOR and FineVision Pod F). Measurements of the TF-MTF were conducted using both monochromatic and polychromatic light in a customized optical bench. The refractive designs exhibited distinct haloes in the PSFs. When comparing the refractive and diffractive designs, opposite signs of LCA were observed at near foci. These findings emphasize the influence of the optical design of IOLs on their performance under polychromatic light, providing valuable information for vision care professionals when selecting the most suitable lens for each patient.

Extended Depth of Focus Two-Photon Light-Sheet Microscopy for In Vivo Fluorescence Imaging of Large Multicellular Organisms at Cellular Resolution

Two-photon excitation in light-sheet microscopy advances applications to live imaging of multicellular organisms. In a previous study, we developed a two-photon Bessel beam light-sheet microscope with a nearly 1-mm field of view and less than 4-μm axial resolution, using a low magnification (10×), middle numerical aperture (NA 0.5) detection objective. In this study, we aimed to construct a light-sheet microscope with higher resolution imaging while maintaining the large field of view, using low magnification (16×) with a high NA 0.8 objective. To address potential illumination and detection mismatch, we investigated the use of a depth of focus (DOF) extension method. Specifically, we used a stair-step device composed of five-layer annular zones that extended DOF two-fold, enough to cover the light-sheet thickness. Resolution measurements using fluorescent beads showed that the reduction in resolutions was small. We then applied this system to in vivo imaging of medaka fish and found that image quality degradation at the distal site of the beam injection could be compensated. This demonstrates that the extended DOF system combined with wide-field two-photon light-sheet microscopy offers a simple and easy setup for live imaging application of large multicellular organism specimens with sub-cellular resolution.

Evaluation of Postoperative Total Ocular Aberrations After Bilateral Implantation of Monofocal IOL with Extended Depth of Focus in Phacoemulsification

Purpose

To evaluate postoperative visual performance and total ocular aberration in cataract patients after implantation of the TECNIS Eyhance™ intraocular lens (IOL).

Methods

Our study is a prospective interventional non-comparative study that was conducted on 34 eyes of 17 patients who underwent phacoemulsification and Eyhance IOL implantation. Postoperative corrected and uncorrected near and far visual acuity and total ocular aberration were assessed 3 months after surgery.

Results

Our study included 34 eyes of 17 patients. At the third postoperative month, the mean spherical equivalent (SE) was -0.32 diopters (D) (SD ±0.62), and the mean distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) was 0.33 (SD ±0.15) and 0.42 (SD ±0.17) decimal notation (DN) monocular and binocular, respectively. The mean near distance with maximum visual acuity was 79.47 cm (SD ±7.70) and 74.76 cm (SD ±7.90) monocular and binocular, respectively. The mean postoperative minimum reading addition (add) was 1.6 D (SD ±0.47). The mean spherical aberration (SA) was 0.13 µm (SD ±0.09). The correlation of amount of spherical aberration with power of minimum reading add at 40 cm was not statistically significant (p=0.324).

Conclusion

The TECNIS Eyhance IOL provides good intermediate visual acuity and decreases the power of the reading add needed after phacoemulsification.

The REVIVE Study: Long Term Outcomes of a Novel Non-Diffractive Extended Vision IOL versus Monofocal Control IOL

PURPOSE

To evaluate the long-term (>1 yr) outcomes a non-diffractive extended vision intraocular lens (AcrySof IQ Vivity) compared to monofocal control.

SETTING

This was a multicenter trial that took place in 4 separate private ophthalmology practices throughout the United States.

DESIGN

This was a prospective, non-interventional, controlled, multicenter trial. All subjects were enrolled from participants in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clinical trial that led to the approval of the AcrySof IQ Vivity.

METHODS

Binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCDVA), distance corrected visual acuity (DCVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) at 66cm, distance corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA) at 66cm, uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) at 40cm, and distance corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) at 40cm were measured. The binocular defocus curve was measured. A 23-question survey on visual performance including questions on spectacle independence, satisfaction, dysphotopsias, and likelihood of recommending their lens to another person was used administered.

RESULTS

A total of 64 eyes of 32 subjects were enrolled. Seventeen subjects had bilateral implantation of the AcrySof IQ Vivity lens, and 15 subjects had bilateral implantation of the AcrySof IQ Monofocal (SN60WF). Mean follow up time was 1078 days for the study group compared to 1067 days for the control group (p = 0.92). There were no differences in UCVA or DCVA between the two groups. Compared to control, the AcrySof IQ Vivity group had better mean binocular UIVA (logMAR 0.29 vs 0.18; p = 0.09), DCIVA (logMAR 0.33 vs 0.11; p = 0.003), UNVA (logMAR 0.49 vs 0.30, p = 0.01), and DCNVA (logMAR 0.54 vs 0.29; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The AcrySof IQ Vivity is a novel, non-diffractive extended range of vision intraocular lens that provides long-term, enhanced visual acuity at intermediate and near ranges with high levels of patient satisfaction and minimal dysphotopsias.

Visualization of Ray Propagation through Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lenses

Extended depth-of-focus (EDoF) presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL) models differ in their optical design and performance. In the laboratory, we compared the ray propagation and light intensity profiles of four IOLs: the non-diffractive AcrySof IQ Vivity (Alcon Inc., Fort Worth, TX, USA) and two diffractive models, Symfony ZXR00 (Johnson & Johnson Vision, Jacksonville, FL, USA) and AT Lara 829 MP (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Berlin, Germany). A fourth lens, the monofocal AcrySof IQ SN60WF (Alcon Inc.) acted as the control. We projected a 520 nm laser light through each submerged lens in a bath of fluorescein solution. A camera mounted on a microscope captured the light that emerged from the IOL. We recorded the IOLs' point spread function (PSF) to determine the presence of unwanted visual effects. The ray propagation visualization and light intensity profile of the monofocal control showed one distinct focus, while the AcrySof IQ Vivity demonstrated an extended focus area. We observed two distinct foci with each diffractive IOL. We found a lower level of light spread beyond the PSF center for the AcrySof IQ Vivity compared to the diffractive IOLs. In conclusion, we could confirm the extended range of focus for all the EDoF IOL models. However, the non-diffractive AcrySof IQ Vivity appears to have a smoother transition from a far to an intermediate range. We discuss whether, in clinical use, the higher level of spurious light we found in the diffractive designs may translate into increased dysphotopsia.

Efficacy of contact lenses for myopia control: Insights from a randomised, contralateral study design

PURPOSE

To determine the efficacy of two myopia control contact lenses (CL) compared with a single-vision (SV) CL.

METHODS

Ninety-five Chinese children with myopia, aged 7-13 years in a 1-year prospective, randomised, contralateral, cross-over clinical trial with 3 groups; bilateral SVCL (Group I); randomised, contralateral wear of an extended depth of focus (EDOF) CL and SVCL (Group II) and MiSight® CL and SVCL (Group III). In Groups II and III, CL were crossed over at the 6-month point (Stage 1) and worn for a further 6 months (Stage 2). Group I wore SVCL during both stages. At baseline and the end of each stage, cycloplegic spherical equivalent refractive error (SE) and axial length (AL) were measured. Six-monthly ΔSE/ΔAL across groups was analysed using a linear mixed model (CL type, stage, eye and eye* stage included as factors). Intra-group paired differences between eyes were determined.

RESULTS

In Group I, mean (SD) ΔSE/ΔAL with SVCL was -0.41 (0.28) D/0.13 (0.09) mm and -0.25 (0.27) D/0.16 (0.09) mm for stages 1 and 2, with a mean paired difference between eyes of 0.01 D/0.01 mm and 0.05 D/-0.01 mm, respectively. ΔSE/ΔAL with SVCL was similar across Groups I to III (Stage 1: p = 0.89/0.44, Stage 2: p = 0.70/ 0.64). In Groups II and III, ΔSE/ΔAL was lower with the EDOF and MiSight® CL than the contralateral SVCL in 68% to 94% of participants, and adjusted 6-month ΔSE/ΔAL with EDOF was similar to MiSight® (p = 0.49/0.56 for ΔSE/ΔAL, respectively). Discontinuations across the three groups were high, but not different between the groups (33.3%, 48.4% and 50% for Groups I to III, respectively [p = 0.19]) and most discontinuations occurred immediately after baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended depth of focus and MiSight® CL demonstrated similar efficacy in slowing myopia. When switched from a myopia control CL to SVCL, myopia progression was similar to that observed with age-matched wearers in SVCL and not suggestive of rebound.

Evaluation of macular visibility through a high-order aspheric intraocular lens using a simulated model eye

We evaluated the macular visibility of a newly designed extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses (IOL) using a wide viewing system for macular manipulation (Risight;60D, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) in a model eye and compared it with various other types of IOLs. We used a model eye that was constructed based on the Glustrand model to compare a newly designed EDOF IOL (DIB00V; Johnson & Johnson Surgical Vision), an EDOF IOL with a diffraction grating (ZXR00V; Johnson & Johnson surgical Vision), and a monofocal aspheric (DCB00V; Johnson & Johnson Vision, XY-1; HOYA Surgical Optics, Tokyo, Japan) or spherical IOL (NX70s; Santen Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd). In the model eye, a 1951 United States Air Force (USAF) test was placed at the location of the macula. The contrasts in a range of spatial frequencies were quantified using the images obtained from the 1951 USAF test target. The contrast at each spatial frequency was plotted and integrated to calculate the area under the curve contrast (AUC-contrast). Qualitative evaluations showed that good-quality images were obtained for all IOLs. At a spatial frequency of 16 LP/mm, the average contrast was the highest for the DIB00V and NX70s (0.216 each). The highest average contrast at 32 LP/mm was obtained using the NX70s (0.128), and at 64 LP/mm using the DIB00V (0.123). The horizontal AUC-contrast was the highest for the NX70s (8.754), and the vertical AUC-contrast was the highest for the DIB00V (8.334). On average, the DIB00V had the highest AUC-contrast value (8.227). The high-order aspheric IOL, DIB00V, was found to exhibit good macular visibility despite being an EDOF IOL.

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.

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.

Comparison of visual results and optical quality of two presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses: TECNIS symfony versus TECNIS synergy

PURPOSE

This study compared the extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) (ZXR00; Tecnis® Symfony^®, Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, USA) and a new presbyopia-correcting IOL that combines EDOF and multifocal profiles (ZFR00; Tecnis^® Synergy^®, Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, USA) with the same material.

METHODS

The medical records of patients undergoing cataract surgery with ZXR00 or ZFR00 implantation between March 2021 and July 2021 and with the data available for the 3-month visit were reviewed. The uncorrected near, intermediate, and distance visual acuity (VA), corrected distance VA, defocus curves, refractive errors (RE), optical quality parameters, and patient-reported visual performance parameters were the main outcome measures.

RESULTS

Among the twenty-three enrolled patients, twelve patients (21 eyes) received ZXR00 and nine patients (17 eyes) received ZFR00. The mean age of the patients was 59.6 ± 10.6 (range: 49 to 70) and 65.2 ± 8.2 (range: 45 to 82) years in ZXR00 and ZFR00 groups, respectively, without significant difference. There was not a significant difference between the two groups in terms of baseline parameters and postoperative RE. The ZFR00 group showed markedly superior intermediate and near VA (p < 0.001 for all) at 3 months postoperatively. In terms of optical quality, ZXR00 was significantly better than ZFR00 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both IOLs had comparable distance VA. ZFR00 IOL was superior for intermediate and near visual acuity, but ZXR00 IOL was better for optical quality. Research with more participants is needed to support this finding.

Clinical Outcomes and Quality of Vision Associated with Bilateral Implantation of a Wavefront Shaping Presbyopia Correcting Intraocular Lens

Purpose

To provide normative visual acuity and quality of vision data related to bilateral implantation of a wavefront shaping presbyopia correcting intraocular lens (IOL).

Patients and Methods

This was a non-interventional research study of the refraction, visual acuity (VA) and quality of vision achieved after bilateral implantation of a wavefront shaping presbyopia correcting intraocular lens between 3 months and 12 months post-surgery. The manifest refraction, and uncorrected and distance corrected VA at near, intermediate and distance (40 cm, 50 cm, 66cm, 4 m) were tested. Binocular mesopic VA at 4m and uncorrected photopic low contrast (25%) VA at 4 m were also tested, the latter with and without a glare source. A patient reported outcome questionnaire was administered. Defocus curve testing with and without simulated myopia in the non-dominant eye was also tested (reported elsewhere).

Results

Forty subjects completed the study. There was no statistically significant difference between the uncorrected and distance corrected VA at any distance. Mean logMAR binocular VAs were (−0.07 ± 0.07) at 4 m, (0.00 ± 0.07) at 66 cm and (0.07 ± 0.11) at 40 cm. Uncorrected photopic low contrast VA was statistically significantly better without glare (0.09 ± 0.10) compared to with glare (0.44 ± 0.21, p < 0.01). Reported glare, halos and starbursts were “not at all” Or “a little” bothersome for more than 95% of subjects. Hazy vision and blurred vision were reported most often.

Conclusion

The Vivity IOL provided patients with good distance and intermediate vision, and functional near vision with low reported bother from glare, halos, or starbursts.

Point your SmartPhone at the code above. If you have a QR code reader the video abstract will appear. Or use:

https://youtu.be/fCukWtZz0pk

Comparative Analysis of a New Hybrid EDOF-Multifocal Diffractive Intraocular Lens with a Trifocal Diffractive Intraocular Lens

PURPOSE

To compare visual acuity, defocus curve and visual quality of life performances of a new hybrid refractive-diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) and a trifocal diffractive IOL.

METHODS

Patients who underwent cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of ZFR00V or TFNT00 IOLs were enrolled in this study. The main outcomes were defined as uncorrected distant, intermediate and near visual acuities (UDVA, UIVA and UNVA, respectively), defocus curve and VF-14 questionnaire aimed for visual performance.

RESULTS

Fifty patients, of whom 30 had bilateral ZFR00V implantation, were enrolled in the study. Patients with ZFR00V had significantly better UIVA than patients with TFNT00 (0.05 ± 0.03 vs. 0.07 ± 0.04 logMAR, P = 0.02). Defocus curve showed significantly higher visual acuity in intermediate range for ZFR00V IOL between -1.00 and -1.50 dioptres (all P < 0.05). All patients had good visual performance with mean VF-14 scores above 3 points with no significant difference between two IOL models. Spectacle independence was 100% for both distant and near vision in both group of patients.

CONCLUSION

Bilateral implantation of ZFR00V in cataract patients shows better intermediate visual acuity scores and similar daily visual performance when compared with trifocal TFNT00 IOL.

Quantitative biometric cutoffs for the choice of the intraocular lens power calculation formula for a recently introduced nondiffractive extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens

PURPOSE

This study aimed to analyze biometry values cutoffs for the choice of the best intraocular lens power calculation formula for AcrySof IQ Vivity intraocular lens.

METHODS

The study was designed as interventional case series with 3 months of follow-up. Intraocular lens power calculation formulas included Barrett Universal II and SRK/T. The first was adopted for the intraocular lens power choice. The quantitative analysis focused on the identification of specific biometric cutoffs considering axial length, anterior chamber depth, and corneal powers. We included only the dominant eye in the statistical analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred and eight eyes of 54 patients (23 males; mean age 62 ± 5 years) with no ocular diseases were included. Best-corrected visual acuity improved from 0.3 ± 0.2 to 0.0 ± 0.0 logMAR. All the eyes reached spectacles-free far and intermediate visions; a spherical addition of + 1.0D was necessary to adjust near vision. We identified significant quantitative cutoffs based on axial length and anterior chamber depth. Barrett Universal II resulted the best formula for eyes disclosing an axial length >25 mm, whereas SRK/T turned out to be the best choice for the eyes characterized by an anterior chamber depth <2.8 mm. Our analysis disclosed an overall sensitivity of 0.8 and a specificity of 0.7 (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Axial length and anterior chamber depth influence the choice of Barrett Universal II and SRK/T formulas. Quantitative biometric cutoffs may be useful to discriminate the best formula to be adopted.

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

Purpose: To evaluate the visual acuity, defocus curve and visual quality of life following bilateral implantation of a new hybrid extended depth of focus (EDOF)-multifocal diffractive intraocular lens (IOL). Methods: Patients who underwent cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of Tecnis Synergy IOL were enrolled in this study. The main outcomes were defined as uncorrected distant, intermediate and near visual acuities (UDVA, UIVA and UNVA, respectively), defocus curve and VF-14 questionnaire aimed for visual performance. Results: The mean ± SD values for binocular UDVA, UIVA and UNVA were -0.01 ± 0.04, 0.05 ± 0.03 and 0.03 ± 0.05 logMAR, respectively. Defocus curve showed a continuous vision above 0.16 logMAR between +0.50 D and -2.50 D. Patients had good visual performance with mean VF-14 scores above 3 points. Driving at night (3.47 ± 0.64) was found to be the most difficult task to perform. Spectacle independence was 100% for both distant and near vision. Conclusion: Bilateral implantation of Tecnis Synergy IOL in cataract patients shows good visual acuity and performance, covering a good visual range without any need of spectacles.

Comparison Between an Intraocular Lens With Extended Depth of Focus (Tecnis Symfony ZXR00) and a New Monofocal Intraocular Lens With Enhanced Intermediate Vision (Tecnis Eyhance ICB00)

PURPOSE

This study compared the extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) (ZXR00; Tecnis Symfony, Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, US) to a novel, higher-order aspheric monofocal IOL (ICB00; Tecnis Eyhance, Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, US) which uses the same platform and material.

METHODS

Medical records of patients undergoing cataract surgery with ZXR00 or ICB00 implantation between March 2020 and January 2021 and with the data available for the 3-month visit were reviewed. The uncorrected near, intermediate, and distance visual acuity (VA); corrected distance VA; and optical quality parameters were the main outcome measures.

RESULTS

Among the 174 enrolled patients, 72 and 102 received the ZXR00 and ICB00, respectively. The average patient ages were 59.6 ± 10.6 (range: 49 to 70) and 65.2 ± 8.2 (range: 45 to 82) years in the ZXR00 and ICB00 groups, respectively, with significantly older patients in the ICB00 group. The other baseline parameters were not different for the 2 groups. Compared to the ICB00 group, the ZXR00 group showed markedly superior near VA (P < 0.05) at 3 months postoperatively. In terms of optical quality, ICB00 was, statistically, significantly superior to ZXR00.

CONCLUSIONS

The ZXR00 showed remarkable near vision and defocus curve smoothness, while the ICB00 achieved better optical quality. The 2 IOLs had comparable distance and intermediate vision.

Clinical Outcomes, Contrast Sensitivity, Reading Performance and Patient Satisfaction Following Bilateral Implantation of AT LARA 829MP EDoF IOLs

Purpose

To evaluate the visual outcomes, contrast sensitivity, reading performance and patient satisfaction after bilateral implantation of AT LARA extended depth of focus (EDoF) intraocular lenses (IOLs).

Methods

Patients undergoing phacoemulsification for age-related cataract and satisfying the eligibility criteria underwent bilateral implantation with AT LARA EDoF IOLs (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). At follow-up visits of 1, 3, 6 and 12 months, binocular uncorrected and corrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuity, reading performance, defocus curve, contrast sensitivity and patient satisfaction for dysphotopsia and spectacle independence were evaluated.

Results

A total of 60 eyes from 30 patients with a mean age of 65.40±7.71 years were included in the study. At 12 months, 83% of patients (n=25) had binocular cumulative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 20/20 or better. Postoperative spherical equivalent refraction accuracy was within ±0.50 D for 95% of eyes (n=57) and refractive cylinder accuracy was within ≤0.50 D in 95% of eyes (n=57). The mean binocular uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) was 0.16±0.09 logMAR, and the mean uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) at 60 and 80 cm was 0.01±0.09 and 0.03±0.08 logMAR, respectively, at 12 months. Reading speeds at 40, 60 and 80 cm showed improvement over time. No patient had complaints of severe dysphotopsia and none of the patients required glasses for any activity. No eye underwent YAG-laser capsulotomy for significant posterior capsule opacification at the end of mean follow-up.

Conclusion

In our limited experience of 30 patients at 12 months, AT LARA EDoF IOLs resulted in excellent visual outcomes for uncorrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuity. The incidence of dysphotopsia and spectacle dependence was low, resulting in good patient satisfaction.

Trial Registry

CTRI/2020/08/027105 (www.ctri.nic.in).

The Effect of Spectacle-Induced Low Myopia in the Non-Dominant Eye on the Binocular Defocus Curve with a Non-Diffractive Extended Vision Intraocular Lens

Purpose

To quantify the changes in the binocular defocus curve associated with the Vivity™ non-diffractive extended vision intraocular lens when the dominant eye was targeted for emmetropia and the non-dominant eye was artificially targeted for slight myopia using spectacles.

Patients and Methods

This was a non-interventional research study of the corrected binocular defocus curve associated with binocular emmetropia (Setting A) and with emmetropia in the dominant eye and two different levels of myopia simulated in the non-dominant eye (−0.50 D, Setting B and −1.00 D, Setting C). Subjects were patients implanted with the AcrySof^® IQ Vivity^® intraocular lens in both eyes 3 to 12 months previously. Using the defocus data, the percentage of subjects with a continuous 2.5 D range of vision (distance to 40 cm) was calculated for various levels of minimum visual acuity (VA).

Results

Forty subjects were enrolled. The mean spherical equivalent refraction was −0.06 D ± 0.36 D, with 0.37 D ± 0.29 D of refractive cylinder. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean VA at −0.25 D or at −0.50 D vergences between the test Settings, but there was a statistically significant difference at all other vergences. Differences were particularly noticeable at −2.00 D, −2.50 D and −3.00 D, where higher myopia in the non-dominant eye yielded better binocular VA. A 2.5 D range of functional vision (20/25) was achieved by 38% of subjects at Setting A, 68% of subjects at Setting B and 85% of subjects at Setting C. At setting C, all but one subject (39/40, 97.5%) had a 2.5 D range of vision with a VA of 20/32 or better.

Conclusion

Significant gains in binocular near vision, with only a nominal effect on distance vision, can be achieved with the Vivity IOL by leaving the non-dominant eye of patients with 0.50 D or 1.00 D of myopia.

Comparison of an aspheric monofocal intraocular lens with the new generation monofocal lens using defocus curve

Purpose:

The aim of this study was to compare the visual outcomes of two monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs), with emphasis on the defocus curve.

Methods:

A total of 116 consecutive eyes with cataract, undergoing phacoemulsification with IOL implantation were included in the observational case series, and divided into two groups. 71 eyes were implanted with Tecnis Eyhance and 45 with Tecnis 1 monofocal IOL. Eyes with ocular comorbidities, previous ocular surgeries and corneal astigmatism >1 Diopters (D) were excluded from the study. Complete ophthalmic evaluation including uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), corrected intermediate visual acuity (CIVA), uncorrected visual acuity (UNVA), corrected near visual acuity (CNVA) was noted and defocus levels ranging from - 4.00 D to + 1.00 D were plotted postoperatively in both groups.

Results:

Uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) and uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) was significantly better in Tecnis Eyhance group compared to Tecnis 1 monofocal. Both the IOLs have similar performance for distance vision but visual acuity at intermediate and near is significantly better with Tecnis Eyhance compared to Tecnis 1 piece IOL.

Conclusion:

Tecnis Eyhance IOL with its better defocus curve, not only provides good distance, but intermediate vision as well. With significantly better visual acuity across the range of near and intermediate vision, Tecnis Eyhance IOL can prove to be a viable and reasonable option for patients who are more dependent on intermediate vision in daily activities.

Visual outcomes of binocular implantation of a new extended depth of focus intraocular lens

Purpose:

To evaluate the visual outcomes of bilateral implantation of a new hydrophobic foldable extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL.

Methods:

All cases undergoing phacoemulsification with bilateral implantation of Supraphob Infocus IOL between December 2017 and July 2018 at a tertiary eye care center were recruited in this prospective interventional study. The primary outcome measures were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), and uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA). Postoperative follow-up was done on day 1, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months.

Results:

One hundred and four eyes of 52 patients with a mean age of 58.4 ± 9.3 years were included. The mean UDVA improved from 0.84 ± 0.32 logMAR preoperatively to 0.11 ± 0.08 logMAR at 3 months following surgery. At the final follow-up, the binocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA was 0.03 ± 0.07, 0.14 ± 0.06, and 0.36 ± 0.05 logMAR, respectively. The mean CS was 1.47 ± 0.06 logCS. The distance and near stereopsis was 90.2 ± 24.8 s of arc (arcsec) and 62.5 ± 19.4 arcsec, respectively. The mean total higher-order aberration (HOA), point spread function, and modulation transfer function were 0.30 ± 0.13, 0.07 ± 0.08, and 0.26 ± 0.07, respectively.

Conclusion:

The Supraphob Infocus EDOF IOL provides good unaided visual acuity for distance, intermediate, and near along with a high quality of vision as assessed by contrast sensitivity, HOAs, and stereoacuity. It may be a potential alternative to the currently available EDOF IOLs in providing good visual acuity at variable distances.

Visual Acuity, Quality of Vision, and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Bilateral Implantation with a Trifocal or Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens

Purpose

To evaluate the visual acuity, quality of vision and patient reported outcomes for patients that were either bilaterally implanted with a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) or an extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL.

Design

Single site, prospective, non-interventional, masked, two-arm comparative study.

Methods

Subjects who had prior uncomplicated cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of one of the lenses above were evaluated. Subjects in each group were assessed during a single visit. The uncorrected and best distance-corrected binocular near (40 cm), intermediate (60 cm), and distance visual acuity (VA) were measured, along with a spectacle independence questionnaire, a quality of vision questionnaire and contrast sensitivity measured in both mesopic and photopic conditions.

Results

The study included 23 EDOF and 25 trifocal subjects. Binocular Uncorrected VAs were similar at distance and intermediate, but about 1.5 lines better at near with the trifocal (p < 0.001). Binocular best corrected distance – VA was significantly better with the EDOF lens (0.5 lines, p < 0.001), though the mean VA was better than 20/20 in both groups. Distance-corrected intermediate and near VA were significantly better with the trifocal IOL (1 line and 1.5 lines respectively, p < 0.001). Significantly more trifocal subjects had 20/25 or better VA at all three test distances (64% vs 4%, p<0.001). Patient reported spectacle independence was significantly higher in the trifocal group, driven primarily by differences in near vision. Mesopic and photopic binocular contrast sensitivity, satisfaction and subjective quality of vision scores were similar between groups.

Conclusion

The trifocal IOL provided significantly better near vision (1.5 lines) with slightly worse distance vision (0.5 lines), while providing similar contrast sensitivity and visual quality. It may be the preferred choice for patients desiring more spectacle independence.

A Comparative Evaluation of Diffractive Trifocal and New Refractive/Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses for Refractive Lens Exchange

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the visual performance and quality of life (QOL) associated with refractive/extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses (IOLs) and diffractive trifocal IOLs in refractive lens exchange patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a comparative interventional study of patients undergoing implantation of Lucidis (Swiss Advanced Vision, SAV‑IOL SA, Neuchâtel, Switzerland) or AT LISA tri 839MP (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Germany) IOLs. Near, intermediate, and distance best corrected and uncorrected visual acuities were collected at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. The vision-related QOL was evaluated 1 and 3 months after surgery, using the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-14 (VF-14 QOL questionnaire).

RESULTS

A total of 74 patients underwent refractive lens exchange and IOL implantation, with 38 patients in the EDOF group and 36 in the trifocal group. Among all visual acuities, uncorrected near visual acuity was statistically significantly better with the Lucidis IOL at the first month (p = .02) and diminished at the third-month visit (p = .16). When we compared the VF-14 QOL questionnaire scores, reading small print, reading a newspaper or book, and driving at night were statistically significantly better in the Lucidis group at the first month (p = .00, for each). That difference persisted only in driving at night at the third-month visit (p = .04). Reading small print, driving at night, and doing fine handwork were the most difficult tasks in the AT LISA group at the first month, and only driving at night remained so at the third-month visit.

CONCLUSIONS

The refractive results and visual outcomes at all distances of EDOF and trifocal IOLs were highly satisfactory. However, the EDOF design in the Lucidis IOL achieves lower rates of glare in the early period after refractive lens exchange.

Visual Acuity, Defocus Curve, Reading Speed and Patient Satisfaction with a Combined Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens and Multifocal Intraocular Lens Modality

Purpose

To evaluate the vision, defocus curve, reading speed and patient satisfaction after implantation of an extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL in one eye and a diffractive multifocal in the fellow eye.

Setting

One clinical practice in the USA.

Design

Prospective unmasked non-randomized clinical trial.

Methods

Subjects presenting for routine cataract surgery interested in reducing their dependence on spectacles were enrolled. Study endpoints included uncorrected and distance-corrected binocular distance (4 m), intermediate (66 cm) and near (40 cm) visual acuity at 3 months. Additional endpoints included the residual refraction, spectacle independence, overall satisfaction with vision, visual symptoms, reading speed and defocus curve.

Results

With a best distance correction, 77% (30/39) of subjects had 20/25 or better VA at distance, intermediate and near and nearly all subjects had 20/32 or better VA at all three distances. Defocus curve results showed mean continuous vision of 20/25 or better from plano to −2.50 D. Nearly 80% (31/39) of subjects had 20/25 visual acuity from 0.00 D to −2.50 D. The critical print size was between 0.3 and 0.4 logMAR (20/40 to 20/50 Snellen Equivalent). Spectacle independence was 100% at distance, 95% at intermediate and approximately 70% at near. The percentage of subjects who were “not at all” or “slightly” bothered by visual disturbances ranged from 64% (16/25) for Halos to 88% (22/25) for Starbursts.

Conclusions

EDOF/bifocal IOL blended implantation results in at least 20/25 mean visual acuity from distance to near with good spectacle independence and low reports of severe visual disturbances.

Defocus Curve and Patient Satisfaction with a New Extended Depth of Focus Toric Intraocular Lens Targeted for Binocular Emmetropia or Slight Myopia in the Non-Dominant Eye

Purpose

To evaluate the defocus curve and patient satisfaction after implantation of an extended depth of focus (EDOF) toric IOL when both eyes were targeted for emmetropia and when the non-dominant eye was targeted for mini monovision (−0.50D).

Methods

A prospective unmasked randomized clinical trial in three clinical practices in the USA. Subjects presenting for routine cataract surgery were assigned to one of two groups, both receiving bilateral toric EDOF lenses. One group had the non-dominant eye targeted for slight myopia (−0.50D). Measures of interest were the postoperative defocus curve and reported patient satisfaction and visual disturbances.

Results

Questionnaire and defocus curve data were available from 37 subjects in the Emmetropia group, while the mini monovision group included questionnaire data from 39 subjects and valid defocus curve data from 14 subjects. Mini monovision subjects had significantly better VA (a half line to a line better, p < 0.05), from a defocus of −1.50 D to −3.00 D. Reported spectacle wear and satisfaction were not significantly different between groups at any distance, but more patients in the mini monovision group reported the ability to function comfortably without glasses at near and overall (near p = 0.02, overall p < 0.01). Halos and starbursts were the two phenomena reported most often for both groups, with reported starbursts slightly more common in the mini monovision group.

Conclusions

A slightly myopic correction in the non-dominant eye improved binocular near vision by 0.5 to 1.0 lines based on defocus curve data. Patients reported better functional vision, but with a slight increase in reported starbursts in the mini monovision group.

Performance of a New-Generation Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens-A Prospective Comparative Study

PURPOSE

The aim was to study the visual performance of a new refractive extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL).

DESIGN

Prospective, comparative study.

METHODS

Consenting patients with age-related cataract willing for bilateral cataract surgery within 2 weeks were implanted with the Supraphob EDOF IOL and those willing for 1 eye surgery were implanted with a monofocal IOL. The uncorrected and best-corrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuity, and contrast sensitivity were evaluated at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. We also inquired about glare, halos, difficulties in night driving, requirement for spectacles, and overall satisfaction with vision.

RESULTS

The Supraphob EDOF group (n = 72 eyes) and the monofocal IOL group (n = 54 eyes) were comparable with respect to all preoperative parameters including biometry, visual acuity, and cataract status. The mean age of participants was 58.4 ± 10.6 years. Both groups had similar distance vision but the EDOF group had significantly better intermediate (0.2 ± 0.2 logMAR vs 0.75 ± 0.19 logMAR, P < 0.001) and near vision (median = N6 vs N12, P < 0.001) compared to the monofocal group at 3 months. The contrast sensitivity was similar in both groups. Patients in the EDOF IOL group had much greater satisfaction for intermediate and near vision. Less than 10% patients reported glare, halos, and difficulty in driving at night in the EDOF group.

CONCLUSIONS

The Supraphob EDOF IOL was effective in improving the distance, intermediate and near vision in majority of patients, and retained good contrast sensitivity with most patients reporting excellent satisfaction.

Visual performance of myopia control soft contact lenses in non-presbyopic myopes

PURPOSE

To compare the visual performance of soft contact lenses reported to reduce myopia progression.

METHODS

In a double-blind, randomized, crossover trial, 30 non-presbyopic myopes wore MiSight™, center-distance Proclear® Multifocal (+2.00 D add), and two prototype lenses for 1 week each. High- and low-contrast visual acuities at 6 m, and 70 and 40 cm; stereopsis at 40 cm; accommodative facility at 33 cm; and horizontal phoria at 3 m and 33 cm were measured after 1 week. Subjective performance was assessed on a numeric rating scale for vision clarity, lack of ghosting, vision stability, haloes, overall vision satisfaction, and ocular comfort. Frequency of eye-strain symptoms and willingness to purchase lenses were also reported with categorical responses. Participants reported wearing times (total and visually acceptable). Linear mixed models and chi-square tests were employed in analysis with level of significance set at 5%. Theoretical optical performance of all lenses was assessed with schematic myopic model eyes (-1.00, -3.00, and -6.00 D) by comparing the slope of the edge spread function (ESF), an indicator for optical performance/resolution and the blur patch size of the line spread function, an indicator for contrast, between the lenses.

RESULTS

Proclear Multifocal and MiSight provided the best distance acuities. However, the prototype lenses were rated significantly higher for many subjective variables, and there were no subjective variables where commercial lenses were rated significantly higher than the prototypes. Theoretical optical performance showed steeper slopes of the ESF and greater blur patch sizes of the LSP with commercial lenses, supporting the clinical findings of better visual acuities but reduced subjective performance. Participants wore prototypes longer and reported their vision acceptable for longer each day compared to MiSight. Both prototypes had the highest willingness-to-purchase rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The prototypes were better tolerated by myopes compared to the commercial soft contact lenses currently used for slowing myopia progression.