Outcomes After Implantation of a Trifocal Toric Intraocular Lens Using Intraoperative Aberrometry, Digital Image Tracking, and Femtosecond Laser.

Purpose: To evaluate the refractive and visual acuity outcomes when using trifocal toric intraocular lenses (IOLs), femtosecond laser assisted cataract surgery (FLACS), swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) biometry, digital image tracking (DT) and intraoperative aberrometry (IA). Methods: This prospective, single-arm, observational study of refractive and visual outcomes included 40 eyes of 34 subjects. Preoperative biometry was performed with the Argos, FLACS and digital marking with LenSx, and IA and DT with ORA. Eyes were implanted with the Clareon PanOptix toric IOL. Study outcome measures included absolute prediction error, residual refractive astigmatism, and monocular uncorrected and distance corrected visual acuity at distance (UDVA, CDVA), intermediate (UIVA, DCIVA; 60cm), and near (UNVA, DCNVA; 40cm). Results: Mean absolute prediction error (spherical equivalent) was 0.43 ± 0.36 D, and the percentage of eyes with absolute prediction error ≤ 0.5 D was 72.5% (29/40 eyes). Mean residual astigmatism was 0.36 ± 0.65 D, and the percentage of eyes with residual astigmatism ≤ 0.5 D was 80% (32/40 eyes). Monocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA was 20/25 or better in 75%, 64%, and 87% of eyes respectively. Monocular CDVA, DCIVA, and DCNVA was 20/25 or better in 95%, 64%, and 87% of eyes respectively. Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that trifocal toric implantation with SS-OCT, FLACS, DT, and IA can provide excellent refractive and visual outcomes.

When the natural lens inside the eye becomes opaque (develops a cataract), it can be surgically replaced with a clear artificial intraocular lens (IOL). There are many different technologies available to the cataract surgeon in order to maximize postoperative visual outcomes with implanted IOLs. These include, modern biometers, femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS), trifocal IOLs, toric IOLs, image-guided digital tracking (DT), and intraoperative aberrometry (IA). Individually, good refractive outcomes have been reported with these technologies. However, there is minimal data on outcomes using a combination of all of them. The purpose of this study was to determine the refractive and visual acuity outcomes when using modern biometers, toric IOLs, FLACS, DT, IA, and trifocal IOLs. The results of this study suggest that trifocal toric implantation with modern biometry, FLACS, DT, and IA can provide excellent refractive and visual outcomes.

Comparison of Astigmatism Prediction Accuracy for Toric Lens Implantation from Two Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Devices.

Purpose: To compare the astigmatism prediction accuracy for toric intraocular lens (IOL) implantation between two swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) devices: Argos (Movu, a Santec Company) and the IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec). Methods: This was a retrospective chart review of 59 eyes (44 patients) with corneal astigmatism and cataract that underwent cataract surgery or refractive lens exchange surgery with a toric IOL. Biometry was performed on all patients prior to cataract surgery and the Barrett toric IOL calculator was used. Visual acuity was measured postoperatively. Manifest refraction was measured at 1 month and compared to the predicted postoperative residual refraction. Preoperative K measurements between devices were also compared. Results: Mean cylinder prediction error was -0.17 ± 0.43 for Argos and 0.12 ± 0.56 for IOLMaster 700. The cylinder prediction error 0.5 D or less was not significantly different between the devices, with 83.1% (49 eyes) for Argos and 76.3% (45 eyes) for IOLMaster 700 (p = 0.206). Spherical equivalent prediction error was 0.13 ± 0.39 for Argos and 0.25 ± 0.50 for IOLMaster 700. The mean spherical equivalent prediction error 0.5 D or less was significantly different between the devices, with 79.7% (47 eyes) for Argos and 61.0% (36 eyes) for IOLMaster 700 (p = 0.016). Conclusion: The prediction accuracies were similar between the devices, except for spherical equivalent, where a higher percentage of eyes were 0.5 D or less of the prediction with the Argos compared to the IOLMaster.

Perceptions of recent ophthalmology residency graduates regarding preparation for practice.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate young ophthalmologists' perceptions of how well residency training prepared them for various aspects of their clinical practice. DESIGN: Self-administered survey. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred sixty-nine United States ophthalmologists who have been in practice for < or =5 years. METHODS: A 4-page questionnaire was mailed to a randomly selected sample of 900 U.S. members and fellows of the American Academy of Ophthalmology who had been in practice for < or =5 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparison of perceived preparedness in clinical and nonclinical areas of ophthalmology practice. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-nine surveys were completed and returned (margin of error, +/-5%). Analysis of tabulated results indicated that 86% said they were extremely or very well prepared to practice comprehensive ophthalmology after residency training. Even so, about half of those respondents also desired some additional clinical training, and two thirds felt the need for some additional training in surgical areas (refractive, oculoplastics/orbital, glaucoma, retina, and pediatric ophthalmic surgery). At least 60% reported being not very or not at all well prepared in 6 of the nonclinical areas explored (business operations and finance, personal financial management, practice management skills, coding and reimbursement, political advocacy, and exposure to practice setting models). With the exception of personal financial management, most ophthalmologists thought training in all of these nonclinical areas was the responsibility of the residency training program. CONCLUSION: The transition from residency training to successful, efficient, ethical, high-quality ophthalmic practice demands a number of skills in addition to diagnostic acumen and surgical ability. In general, the U.S. residency program graduates surveyed are comfortable with their clinical training, but less so with their training in nonclinical areas. Opportunities to help ophthalmologists prepare better for the transition to clinical practice after training appear to exist and might be addressed by training programs, professional organizations, informal physician networks, and other stakeholders.

Photodynamic actions of indocyanine green and trypan blue on human lens epithelial cells in vitro.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the toxicity and photodynamic activity of indocyanine green (ICG) and trypan blue (TryB) on cultured human lensepithelial cells (LECs). DESIGN: Experimental study. METHODS: Lens epithelial cell viability was assessed after treatment with ICG and TryB concentrations ranging from 0.025 to 5.0 mg/ml, and exposure to 806 nm diode laser. RESULTS: At ICG concentrations below 0.5 mg/ml, there was > or =75% cell viability; at higher ICG concentrations there was dose-dependent cytotoxicity in addition to loss of cellular viability due to ICG photosensitization. TryB had little cytotoxicity to the LECs: >80% cells were viable irrespective of the dye concentration or laser treatment. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that ICG may have application as a photosensitizer in the selective eradication of residual LECs after cataract surgery to reduce the incidence of posterior capsule opacification.

Antibody-targeted photodynamic therapy.

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of conjugation of verteporfin (Visudyne, Parkedale Pharmaceuticals, Rochester, Minnesota, USA) to antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor. DESIGN: Experimental study. METHODS: Rabbit antimouse vascular endothelial growth factor polyclonal antibody was conjugated to verteporfin. Fluorescence excitation-emission spectra of verteporfin and conjugate were examined. Vascular endothelial growth factor-expressing murine endothelial cells were incubated with saline, verteporfin, or conjugate, followed by laser exposure or no laser exposure. Cell viability at 1 and 24 hours was assessed via trypan blue exclusion. Results were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance with replication and the Bonferroni multiple comparison test. RESULTS: The fluorescence excitation-emission spectrum of the conjugate was similar to that of verteporfin. After laser exposure, cell viability in conjugate-treated cells was reduced to 6% at 1 hour (P <.0001) and to 4% at 24 hours (P <.0001), compared with approximately 40% in nonlaser-exposed, conjugate-treated cells. The cytotoxicity in the conjugate-treated cells was higher than in verteporfin-treated cells exposed to laser, although the difference did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: The conjugation of verteporfin to polyclonal antibody is possible without the loss of its photosensitizing properties. Conjugated verteporfin destroys cellular targets at least as effectively as verteporfin alone.