Optical characterization and through-focus performance of two advanced monofocal intraocular lenses.

PURPOSE: To compare the refractive power profile, subjective depth-of-field and objective optical quality of two advanced monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) designed to improve intermediate vision. METHODS: This prospective study evaluated forty-six eyes of twenty-three patients, aged 54-68 years, binocularly implanted with two monofocal enhanced intraocular lenses (IOLs), the Tecnis Eyhance and the Physiol Isopure. Subjective through-focus visual acuity curves were obtained by placing trial lenses in front of the eye while wearing its best spherical-cylindrical correction for distance. Objective optical quality was defined as the area under the modulation transfer function, calculated from the wavefront maps measured with a high-resolution aberrometer. The optical design of both lenses was compared based on their refractive power profiles measured with the lenses immersed in saline solution. RESULTS: Both lenses have progressive aspherical geometries, in which the sagittal power decreases rapidly from the center to the edge of the optical zone. Mean monocular through-focus curves show a best corrected distance visual acuity of - 0.02 logMAR with both lenses. Through-focus visual acuity was marginally higher for the Eyhance, with a difference of 1 letter at the defocus position of - 0.5D and 3 letters between - 1.0D and - 2.0D. Objective assessment of optical quality revealed only a difference of about 2 points in MTF area at distance. CONCLUSION: Both IOLs use a similar approach to improve intermediate vision. The Eyhance showed marginally better subjective performance than the Isopure at the target vergences between - 1.00D and - 2.00D, although these results did not reach statistical significance and were not replicated by the objective findings.

Clinical performance and shape analysis of trifocal intraocular lenses via scanning electron microscopy.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate visual performance after implantation of the TFNT (Acrysof Panoptix, Alcon, Fort Worth, Texas, USA) and CNWT (Clareon Panoptix, Alcon, Fort Worth, Texas, USA) intraocular lens (IOL), and compare the lens shape observed by scanning electron microscope (SEM). METHODS: Eighteen patients (18 eyes) received implantation of the CNWT and Twenty patients (20 eyes) received implantation of the TFNT. Exclusion criteria were previous ocular surgeries, ocular pathologies, or corneal abnormalities. Intervention or Observational Procedure(s): Postoperative examination at 1 months including manifest refraction; evaluation of refractive error, distance-corrected visual acuity (DCVA) at 5 m, 1 m, 70 cm, 50 cm, 40 cm, and 30 cm, slit-lamp examination; defocus curve testing; contrast sensitivity (CS) was performed. The lens shape of the TFNT and the CNWT was examined under SEM. RESULTS: Mean spherical equivalent was 0.11 ± 0.41 D (CNWT group) and 0.12 ± 0.34 D (TFNT group) 1 month postoperation. DCVA and defocus curve showed no significant difference between the two groups. CS was significantly higher in CNWT group than TFNT group at spatial frequencies of 6 cycles per degree (cpd). Observation of the IOL with a scanning electron microscope (SEM) revealed that CNWT group had improved diffraction structure and edge processing accuracy compared to TFNT group. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference between the two groups in the defocus curve and visual acuity at all distances. CS was better in the CNWT group than in the TFNT group. IOL surface features may affect CS.

Depth of field and visual performance after implantation of a new hydrophobic trifocal intraocular lens.

PURPOSE: To assess the depth of field (DOF) by means of defocus curve analysis applying different visual acuity criteria in patients following cataract surgery and bilateral implantation of a new trifocal diffractive intraocular lens (IOL). METHODS: Fifty eyes of 25 consecutive patients who underwent implantation of the Asqelio™ trifocal IOL (AST Products Inc., USA) were enrolled in this observational prospective study. Monocular subjective DOF was obtained from defocus curves with absolute and relative criteria of tolerance for different visual acuities values. Patient's visual satisfaction, postoperative refraction and visual acuity at far, intermediate (67 cm) and near (40 cm) distances were also measured at 1 and 3-months post-surgery. Analysis of variance was used to assess differences in refractive error after the surgical procedure, and paired t-tests were used to assess differences in VA. Patient satisfaction results were reported as percentages. RESULTS: Spherical equivalent was 0.05 ± 0.23 D and residual cylinder 0.01 ± 0.23 D 3-months after the surgery. Absolute DOF obtained was 3.29 ± 0.91 D considering 0.1 LogMAR as cut-off value, and 4.82 ± 0.69 D when 0.3 logMAR as cutoff value. Relative DOF considering a drop of 0.1 logMAR from maximum visual acuity was 2.57 ± 0.82 D, and 1.27 ± 0.70 D when a drop of 0.04 logMAR was considered. Visual acuities obtained 3-months after the surgery were 0.03 ± 0.13, - 0.05 ± 0.06, 0.03 ± 0.08 and 0.04 ± 0.08 logMAR for uncorrected and best-corrected for distance, and best distance-corrected for intermediate and near distances, respectively. Average response to visual satisfaction queries was 8.24/10 at distance, 8.04/10 at intermediate, and 7.88/10 at near. CONCLUSIONS: Patients implanted with this trifocal IOL showed a significant improvement in visual acuity at different distances providing wide absolute and relative DOF values. The outcomes demonstrate that this lens is predictable yielding good patient satisfaction rates.

Developing dynamic defocus curve for evaluating dynamic vision accommodative function.

BACKGROUND: To assess dynamic visual acuity (DVA) under different defocus statuses and explore the assessment of dynamic vision accommodation. METHODS: Twenty subjects (6 males and 14 females) aged 18 to 35 were recruited. Nonmydriatic subjective refraction (sphere and cylinder) and accommodative tests including negative relative accommodation (NRA), positive relative accommodation (PRA), binocular cross cylinder (BCC) and accommodative facility using a flipper were performed. Binocular static visual acuity (SVA) and DVA at 40 degrees per second (dps) were measured under different defocus statuses (+1.5D to -4D in -0.5D steps) based on the refractive error fully corrected. Static and dynamic defocus curves were plotted. The area under the curve (AUC) and corrected dynamic vision accommodation (CDVAc) were calculated. RESULTS: The study showed that the dynamic defocus curve fitted the cubic curve properly (p<0.001). DVA was significantly worse than SVA at all defocused statuses (p<0.001), and the difference was more significant at greater defocus diopters. Single factor analysis indicated that CDVAc was significantly correlated with NRA-PRA (p=0.012) and AUCdynamic (p<0.001). Significant associations were observed between AUCdynamic and PRA (p=0.013) as well as NRA-PRA (p=0.021). Meanwhile, DVA was positively correlated with PRA at 0D, -1.0D, -1.5D, -2.5D and -3.0D (p<0.05) and with NRA-PRA at 0D, -1.0D, -1.5D, -2.0D and -2.5D (p<0.05). Multiple factor regression analysis indicated that CDVAc (0D ~ -3.5D) and SVA (+1.5D ~ +1.0D & -2.5D ~ -4.0D) were significant influential factors for defocused DVA (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that DVA had a defocus curve similar to that of SVA. CDVAc was feasible for the assessment of dynamic vision accommodative function. The dynamic defocus curve test could efficiently be applied in the evaluation of dynamic visual performance under different defocus statuses.

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.

Comparison of visual and refractive outcomes of diffractive bifocal toric and trifocal toric intraocular lenses 12 months after implantation in patients with moderate to high myopia.

PURPOSE: To compare the visual and refractive outcomes of bifocal toric and trifocal toric intraocular lenses (IOL) in patients with moderate to high myopia at 12 months after implantation. METHOD: This is a prospective and comparative study. In 120 eyes with moderate to high myopia and astigmatism, bifocal toric IOLs (n = 60 eyes) or trifocal toric IOLs (n = 60 eyes) were implanted. Eyes with axial lengths from 24.0 to 26.5 mm were included. Postoperative examinations measured near, intermediate, and distance visual acuity (VA), along with refractive measurements, binocular defocus curves, and patient satisfaction with the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. RESULTS: For uncorrected- and corrected distance intermediate VA, the trifocal group showed significantly better VA at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months than the bifocal group. Driving subscale scores from the questionnaire were significantly better in the trifocal than the bifocal group. Concerning the binocular defocus curve, uncorrected distance VA was significantly higher in the trifocal than bifocal group at test distances of -1.5 D. CONCLUSIONS: Both trifocal and bifocal toric IOLs effectively corrected the near, intermediate, and distance vision in patients with moderate to high myopia and astigmatism. However, intermediate vision was significantly better in eyes with trifocal than bifocal toric IOLs.

Quality of vision, patient satisfaction and long-term visual function after bilateral implantation of a low addition multifocal intraocular lens.

PURPOSE: The aim of the current study was to compare the quality of vision, contrast sensitivity and patient satisfaction with a biaspheric, segmented, rotationally asymmetric IOL (Lentis Comfort LS-313 MF 15-Oculentis GmbH, Berlin, Germany) as opposed to those of a monofocal IOL. METHODS: This prospective single-blind comparative study included two groups of patients affected by bilateral senile cataract who underwent lens extraction and IOL implantation. The first group received a bilateral implantation of a monofocal IOL, and the second group received a bilateral implantation of the Comfort IOL. Twelve months after surgery uncorrected and corrected visual acuity at different distances (30, 50, 70 cm and 4 m), defocus curve and contrast sensitivity were assessed. Patient's satisfaction and spectacle independence were evaluated by mean of the NEI RQL-42 questionnaire. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of near vision. The group of patients implanted with a Comfort IOL obtained the best results at intermediate distances (50 and 70 cm P < .001). Both groups showed an excellent uncorrected distance visual acuity (4 m). No statistically significant differences were found in terms of corrected near, intermediate and distance visual acuity. Concerning contrast sensitivity, no statistically significant differences between the groups were observed at any cycles per degree. The NEI RQL-42 questionnaire showed statistically significant differences between the group for "near vision" (P = .015), "dependence on correction" (P = .048) and "suboptimal correction" (P < .001) subscales. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicated that the Comfort IOL +1.5 D provides a good intermediate spectacle independence together with a high quality of vision, with a low amount of subjective symptoms and a contrast sensitivity similar to those obtained with a monofocal IOL.

Red and green defocus curves and duochrome test in different age groups.

PURPOSE: To compare the eye defocus curves (DCs) obtained with stimuli on red, green, and white backgrounds and to investigate the applicability of the duochrome test (DT) in different age groups. METHODS: 12 elderly (ELD: 59.3 ± 3.9 years) and 8 young (YG: 22.1 ± 1.1 years) subjects were recruited. An optometric assessment with the DT was carried out to obtain the subjective refraction at distance. DCs at distance on green, white, and red backgrounds were measured and the following parameters were deduced: dioptric difference between red-green, green-white, red-white focal positions (minima of the DCs), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and widths of the DCs for red, green, and white. RESULTS: The DC difference between the green-white focal positions (mean ± standard deviation) was -0.12±0.17 diopters (D) (ELD, p= 0.012) and -0.11±0.12 D (YG, p= 0.039), while the red-white difference was not statistically significant. The DC red-green difference was 0.20±0.16 D (ELD, p= 0.002) and 0.18±0.18 D (YG, p = 0.008). The ELD BCVA with green background was significantly worse than BCVA with red (p = 0.007) and white (p = 0.007). The mean value of the DC's width in ELD for green (1.01±0.36 D) was higher than for red (0.77±0.21 D) and for white (0.84±0.35 D), but with no statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Both age groups showed a slight focusing preference for red when using white light. Moreover, ELD showed a worse BCVA with a green compared to a red background. Despite these results deduced by DC analyses, these aspects do not compromise the possibility of using the DT in clinical practice both in the young and in the elderly. Furthermore, the difference of about 0.20 D between red-green DC in both groups confirms the clinical appropriateness of the widespread use of 0.25 D step as the standard minimum difference in power between correcting lenses.

BCLA CLEAR Presbyopia: Evaluation and diagnosis.

It is important to be able to measure the range of clear focus in clinical practice to advise on presbyopia correction techniques and to optimise the correction power. Both subjective and objective techniques are necessary: subjective techniques (such as patient reported outcome questionnaires and defocus curves) assess the impact of presbyopia on a patient and how the combination of residual objective accommodation and their natural DoF work for them; objective techniques (such as autorefraction, corneal topography and lens imaging) allow the clinician to understand how well a technique is working optically and whether it is the right choice or how adjustments can be made to optimise performance. Techniques to assess visual performance and adverse effects must be carefully conducted to gain a reliable end-point, considering the target size, contrast and illumination. Objective techniques are generally more reliable, can help to explain unexpected subjective results and imaging can be a powerful communication tool with patients. A clear diagnosis, excluding factors such as binocular vision issues or digital eye strain that can also cause similar symptoms, is critical for the patient to understand and adapt to presbyopia. Some corrective options are more permanent, such as implanted inlays / intraocular lenses or laser refractive surgery, so the optics can be trialled with contact lenses in advance (including differences between the eyes) to better communicate with the patient how the optics will work for them so they can make an informed choice.

Comparison of Early Vision Quality of SBL-2 and SBL-3 Segmented Refractive Lens.

PURPOSE: To compare objective quality of vision in patients undergoing phacoemulsification with implantation of a bilateral segmented multifocal intraocular lens (SMIOL). METHODS: A retro-prospective study included 110 eyes of 55 patients who underwent cataract surgery with bilateral SMIOL implantation. Patients were divided according to the type of implanted intraocular lens into group 1 (SBL-2, 62 eyes) and group 2 (SBL-3, 48 eyes). Postoperatively, monocular and binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UCIVA, at 66 cm), uncorrected near visual acuity (UCNVA, at 40 cm), corrected near visual acuity (BCNVA) and defocus curve were measured and evaluated. The follow-up period was 6 months. RESULTS: Mean UCDVA in group 1 (SBL-2) was 0.010 ±0.15 LogMAR monocularly, 0.01 ±0.10 LogMAR binocularly, and in group 2 (SBL-3) was 0.02 ±0.11 LogMAR monocularly and -0.07 ±0.09 LogMAR binocularly. Binocular defocus curves showed that the SBL-3 group performed better than the SBL-2 lens at a vergence of -1.50 D corresponding to 66 cm (center distance), averaging 0.03 ±0.11 LogMAR, while the SBL-2 group averaged 0.12 ±0.14 LogMAR (p = 0.01). The -2.50 D vergence characterizing near vision (40 cm) was achieved by the SBL-2 lens in our study at 0.33 ±0.15 LogMAR and by the SBL-3 lens at 0.00 ±0.11 LogMAR (p = 0.00). CONCLUSION: Both SMIOLs provided very good vision at all tested distances 6 months postoperatively. The SBL-2 lens performed better in UCIVA, while the SBL-3 lens excelled in UCDVA and UCNVA.

Prospective Randomized Single-Masked Study of Bilateral Isofocal Optic-Design or Monofocal Intraocular Lenses.

Purpose: To assess refractive and visual outcomes of bilateral implantation of an isofocal optic-design intraocular lens (IOL) or a monofocal IOL following cataract surgery. Methods: A total of 127 patients were recruited into a prospective, single-masked, randomized trial. Sixty-five patients bilaterally implanted with the Isopure Isofocal IOL and 62 patients with the Micropure Monofocal IOL were followed for 4-6 months. Refraction, monocular and binocular uncorrected-distance-visual acuity, corrected-distance-visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected-intermediate-visual acuity and distance-corrected-intermediate-visual acuity (DCIVA, 66/80 cm), uncorrected-near-visual acuity, and distance-corrected-near-visual acuity (DCNVA, 40 cm) were evaluated. Binocular defocus curve, binocular contrast sensitivity (photopic, mesopic with/without glare), and glare and halo phenomena were also measured. Results: 99.23% of eyes were within ±1.00D and 84.62% of eyes within ±0.50D for the Isopure patients and 98.39% and 82.26% for the Micropure patients, respectively. The mean spherical-equivalent was -0.06 ± 0.36D and 0.10 ± 0.32D for the Isopure and Micropure patients, respectively. 98.5% and 100% of patients implanted with the Isopure and Micropure IOLs showed a cumulative binocular CDVA value ≥20/20, respectively. 80% and 67.70% of patients implanted with the Isopure presented a binocular DCIVA ≥20/25 at 80 and 66 cm, respectively. These percentages were 46.8% and 40.3% with the Micropure IOL, respectively. For Isopure, 7.7%, 30.8%, and 58.5% of patients presented a DCNVA ≥20/25, ≥20/32 and ≥20/40, respectively. These values were lower for the Micropure: 1.6%, 19.4% and 46.8%, respectively. Defocus curves showed similar good visual acuity at distance for both lenses with better intermediate vision for the Isopure. Both groups presented good contrast sensitivity, and the size and intensity of halo and glare phenomena were similar between the two. No adverse-events were reported. Conclusion: Our trial shows that both IOLs provide excellent visual acuity and contrast sensitivity for far vision with similar photic phenomena, and the Isopure IOL improved unaided intermediate vision performance.

Defocus Curve and Satisfaction of Patients with Presbyopia After LASIK Using the Differential Modulation of Binocular Longitudinal Spherical Aberration.

Purpose: To investigate the visual acuity and satisfaction of patients after Zhang & Zheng's corneal laser-enhanced accommodation refraction Q (ZZ-CLEAR-Q) surgery utilizing differential modulation of binocular longitudinal spherical aberration and determine its clinical significance. Patients and Methods: This prospective observational study enrolled a consecutive cohort of patients with presbyopia who underwent ZZ-CLEAR-Q surgery between December 2020 and January 2023. The study assessed visual acuity, distance-corrected defocus curve, satisfaction, Q factor, manifest spherical equivalent, and primary spherical aberration, among others, at 3 months postoperatively. Additionally, the study conducted a binocular comparison to analyze the clinical significance of setting the different longitudinal spherical aberrations. Results: A total of 232 eyes of 116 patients were included. The binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity was 20/20 for all patients. At 3 months postoperatively, the binocular uncorrected near visual acuity was Jaeger 1 for 96% of the patients and Jaeger 2 for 100% of the patients. Furthermore, 93.1% of the patients expressed satisfaction. The monocular distance-corrected defocus curve revealed that the dominant eyes had significantly better visual acuity at 0 D (P<0.001), while the non-dominant eyes had significantly better visual acuity across various defocus levels except 0 and -0.50 D (All P<0.05). At 3 months, there were no significant differences between the expected and achieved manifest spherical equivalents, corneal Q factor values, and ocular primary spherical aberration values of both groups. Conclusion: Patients with presbyopia who underwent ZZ-CLEAR-Q surgery were likely to achieve normal uncorrected visual acuity and be satisfied. The increased depth of field has clinical significance for assisting near vision.

Comparison of postoperative visual performance between trifocal intraocular lens and monofocal intraocular lens.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the subjective and objective visual quality more comprehensively after surgery of the commonly used multifocal intraocular lenses (IOL) and monolocal IOL implants through long-term systematic clinical observation, providing reference and basis for clinical application. METHODS: Non-randomized controlled trial. A total of 91 (138 eyes) patients between June 2020 and December 2020 were implanted trifocal IOL or monofocal IOL after phacoemulsification in a tertiary class hospital in Wuhan. Monocular testing 3 months after surgery included best-spectacles corrected and uncorrected visual at distant, intermediate, and near vision; spherical equivalent (SE); defocus curve; modulation transfer function (MTF); dysfunctional lens index (DLI); Strehl ratio (SR); mesopic contrast sensitivity function; quality-of-life, spectacles independence, visual disturbance, and surgical satisfaction surveys 3 months post-surgery. RESULTS: There was statistically better uncorrected vision acuity with trifocal IOLs in all range, while monofocal IOL had statistically better mesopic contrast sensitivity at specific spatial frequencies and statistically worse defocus curves, spectacles independence, and surgical satisfaction. The trifocal IOL performed better in subjective quality of vision and life and spectacles independence questionnaires, and the objective quality of vision had no statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Compared to monofocal IOL, trifocal IOL could provide a full range of clear vision for the majority of patients with simple cataracts, improve the rate of spectacles independence and patient satisfaction. And the objective quality of vision did not show any difference.

Comparison of dynamic defocus curve on cataract patients implanting extended depth of focus and monofocal intraocular lens.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare the dynamic defocus curve on patients post-implantation of the extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) and monofocal intraocular lens (IOL). METHODS: A total of 62 age-related cataract patients receiving phacoemulsification with implantation of TECNIS Symfony (ZXR00) or monofocal IOLs were enrolled. The binocular static and dynamic defocus curves with corrected distance visual acuity were evaluated at one month postoperatively. RESULTS: The ZXR00 group achieved significantly better intermediate (P = 0.044) and near (P = 0.017) visual acuity (VA) than the monofocal group. Two groups had similar uncorrected and corrected distance VA (P > 0.05, respectively). The dynamic defocus curve revealed a smoother decline from 0.0 D to - 2.0 D in the ZXR00 group. Defocused dynamic VA in the ZXR00 group was significantly better (P < 0.05) except at 0.0 D (P = 0.724) and - 0.5 D (P = 0.176). The area under the curve (P = 0.002) and corrected dynamic vision accommodation (P = 0.001) derived from the dynamic defocus curves were better in the ZXR00 group. A positive correlation was observed between defocused dynamic and static VA in both groups (P < 0.001). Multiple linear regression analysis indicated that defocused static VA and corrected dynamic vision accommodation were significant influential factors for the defocused dynamic VA from - 1.0 D to - 3.0 D (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The EDOF IOL provided similar distance vision, better intermediate and near vision, and a better overall dynamic defocus curve than the monofocal IOL. The dynamic defocus curve may be comprehensively applied to evaluate the all-distance dynamic visual performance post-cataract surgery.

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.

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.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of trifocal intraocular lens (AT LISA, Eyecryl SERT trifocal) versus extended depth of focus intraocular lens (Eyhance, Eyecryl SERT EDOF).

Purpose: To compare four different types of intra ocular lenses (IOLs), namely, AT LISA, Eyecryl SERT trifocal, Eyhance, Eyecryl SERT extended depth of focus (EDOF) with respect to their clinical outcomes. Methods: This is a retrospective comparative study in which patients who underwent surgery and one of the four types of IOL were implanted. Postoperative evaluation was recorded at one month, postoperatively. The monocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) (6 m), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) (60 cm), distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (CIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) (40 cm), and corrected near visual acuity (CNVA) were assessed postoperatively on post operative day 30, for all four IOL groups. Defocus curve and contrast sensitivity were also compared. Results: With regards to UDVA and CDVA, P value was not statistically significant. (P = 0.534 and 0.421, respectively). EDOF group of IOLs had statistically significant better UIVA and CIVA than trifocal IOL group. (P < 0.001, 0.012, <0.001) and EDOF group had statistically significant worse P value pertaining to UNVA and CNVA (P < 0.001, 0.070, <0.001, 0.190). Pertaining to contrast sensitivity, EDOF group had better contrast sensitivity than Trifocal IOL group (P < 0.001). Conclusion: All four IOLs compared in this study had good comparable distant visual acuity. Near visual acuity was better with AT LISA and Eyecryl SERT trifocal IOL while intermediate vision was better with Eyhance and Eyecryl SERT EDOF IOL. Contrast sensitivity was better in EDOF IOLs than in both trifocal IOLs.

Early patient-reported outcomes of cataract surgery with implantation of the trifocal liberty 677MY intraocular lens: A pilot study.

PURPOSE: To report our first clinical and patient-reported outcomes in the early postoperative period with a new model of trifocal diffractive intraocular lens (IOL). METHODS: Pilot prospective analysis of the results of 26 eyes of 13 patients (age, 44-79 years) undergoing cataract surgery with implantation of the trifocal diffractive IOL Liberty 677MY (Medicontur Medical Engineering Ltd., Zsámbék, Hungary). The following clinical outcomes were evaluated during the first postoperative month: measurement of distance, intermediate and near visual acuity, binocular defocus curve, and level of spectacle independence, patient satisfaction, perception of photic phenomena, and difficulty in performing several vision-related daily tasks by means of a questionnaire. RESULTS: Mean binocular LogMAR uncorrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuities were -0.03 ± 0.13, 0.21 ± 0.16, and 0.16 ± 0.09, respectively. Furthermore, 100.0%, 84.6% and 92.3% of patients achieved a binocular corrected distance, distance-corrected intermediate and distance-corrected near visual acuity of 20/32 or better, respectively. In the defocus curve, visual acuities were better than 0.2 logMAR for defocus levels between +1.00 and -3.00 D. Spectacle independence was referred by all patients, with any of them reporting dissatisfaction with the outcome of the surgery. The postoperative vision did not lead to difficulties in the daily life in 92.3% of patients. Bothersome halos, glare or starbursts were only reported by only 7.7% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The trifocal IOL evaluated provides a successful visual rehabilitation with minimal photic phenomena associated, leading to high levels of spectacle independence and patient satisfaction.

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.

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.