Precision in IOL Calculation for Cataract Patients with Prior History of Combined RK and LASIK Histories.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of 12 intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulae for eyes that have undergone both radial keratotomy (RK) and laser assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) surgery to determine the efficacy of various IOL calculations for this unique patient group. Currently, research on this surgical topic is limited. Methods: In this retrospective study, 11 eyes from 7 individuals with a history of RK and LASIK who underwent cataract surgery at Hoopes Vision were analyzed. Preoperative biometric and corneal topographic measurements were performed. Subjective refraction was obtained postoperatively. Twelve different intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations were used: Barrett True K No History, Barrett True K (prior LASIK, Prior RK history), Barrett Universal 2, Camellin-Calossi-Camellin (3C), Double K-Modified Holladay, Haigis-L, Galilei, OCT, PEARL-DGS, Potvin-Hill, Panacea, and Shammas. Results: The rankings of mean arithmetic error (MAE), from least to greatest, were as follows: 3C (0.088), Haigis-L-L (-0.508), Shammas (-0.516), OCT Average (-0.538), Barrett True K (-0.557), OCT RK (-0.563), Galilei (-0.570), IOL Master (-0.571), OCT LASIK (-0.583), Barrett True K No History (-0.597), Pearl-DGS (-0.606), Potvin-Hill SF (-0.770), Potvin-Hill TNP (-0.778), Panacea (-0.876), and Barrett Universal 2 (-1.522). The 3C formula achieved the greatest percentage of eyes within ±0.25 D of target range (91%), while Haigis-L, Shammas, Galilei, Potvin Hill, Barrett True K, IOL Master, PEARL-DGS, and OCT formulae performed similarly, achieving 45% of eyes within ±0.75D of target refraction. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the accuracy of the lesser known 3C formula in IOL calculation, particularly for patients who have undergone both RK and LASIK. Well-known formulae, such as Haigis-L, Shammas, and Galilei, which are used by the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS), are viable options, although 3C formulae should be considered in this patient population. Furthermore, larger studies can confirm the best IOL power formulas for post-RK and LASIK cataract patients.

AvaGen Genetic Testing versus Ocular Screening Assessments Including the Keratoconus Severity Score (KSS) and Randleman Ectasia Risk Score System (ERSS) in Refractive Surgery Candidates.

Purpose: To determine whether the AvaGen (AG) Genetic Eye Test provided additional information for screening for the presence of keratoconus (KC) and assessing KC risk in refractive surgery candidates, as compared to the Keratoconus Severity Score (KSS) and Randleman Ectasia Risk Score System (ERSS). Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients seeking refractive surgery at an eye clinic in the United States between January 2022 and July 2023. The inclusion criteria encompassed those with a family history of KC, positive KC indices, or both. Corneal evaluations and demographic information were recorded and analyzed. KSS and ERSS criteria were utilized to evaluate postoperative KC and ectasia risk, respectively. Patients were categorized on how the AG genetic test compared to KSS and ERSS criteria. Clinicians assessed topographic indices, criteria scoring, and AG testing to deliver a definitive surgical recommendation. Results: Among the 19 patients evaluated for ectasia risk, AG testing showed lower KC risk than ocular screening in three patients (15.8%), equal risk in three patients (15.8%), and higher risk in 13 patients (68.4%). The mean AG scores were 45.7 ± 7.0, 49.0 ± 3.46, and 61 ± 13.0 for these respective categories. The most frequently identified KC risk genes were ADAMTS18, COL2A1, and COL4A1. The AG test modified the physician's recommendation for refractive surgery in nine cases (47.4%). Conclusion: Despite the promising application of AG testing for assessing KC risk, further research and development are needed to enhance its applicability for screening refractive surgery candidates, in addition to standard ocular screening approaches.

Comparative Analysis of Corneal Higher-Order Aberrations after Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis, Photorefractive Keratectomy, and Small Incision Lenticule Extraction with Correlations to Change in Myopic Q-Value and Spherical Equivalent with and without Astigmatism.

Background: This retrospective chart review compared the higher-order aberrations (HOAs) among photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) alongside changes in spherical equivalent (SEQ) and corneal shape (Q-value). Methods: Analyzing 371 myopic eyes, including 154 LASIK, 173 PRK, and 44 SMILE cases, Pentacam imaging was utilized pre-operatively and at one-year post-operative visits. Results: All procedures resulted in 100% of patients achieving an uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 20/40 or better, with 87% of LASIK and PRK, and 91% of SMILE patients having 20/20 or better. Significant increases in HOAs were observed across all procedures (p < 0.05), correlating positively with SEQ and Q-value changes (LASIK (0.686, p < 0.05), followed by PRK (0.4503, p < 0.05), and SMILE (0.386, p < 0.05)). Vertical coma and spherical aberration (SA) were the primary factors for heightened aberration magnitude among the procedures (p < 0.05), with the largest contribution in SMILE, which is likely attributed to the centration at the corneal apex. Notably, PRK showed insignificant changes in vertical coma (-0.197 µm ± 0.0168 to -0.192 µm ± 0.0198, p = 0.78), with an increase in oblique trefoil (p < 0.05). Conclusions: These findings underscore differences in HOAs among PRK, LASIK, and SMILE, helping to guide clinicians.

Predictability of Existing IOL Formulas After Cataract Surgery in Patients with a Previous History of Radial Keratotomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study and Literature Review.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of 12 different intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas for post-radial keratotomy (RK) eyes. The investigation utilizes recent advances in topography/tomography devices and artificial intelligence (AI)-based calculators, comparing the results to those reported in current literature to assess the efficacy and predictability of IOL calculations for this patient group. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 37 eyes from 24 individuals with a history of RK who underwent cataract surgery at Hoopes Vision Center were analyzed. Biometry and corneal topography measurements were taken preoperatively. Subjective refraction was obtained 6 months postoperatively. Twelve different IOL power calculations were used, including the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) post-RK online formula, and the Barrett True K, Double K modified-Holladay 1, Haigis-L, Panacea, Camellin-Calossi, Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) 2.0, Kane, and Prediction Enhanced by Artificial Intelligence and output Linearization-Debellemanière, Gatinel, and Saad (PEARL-DGS) formulas. Outcome measures included median absolute error (MedAE), mean absolute error (MAE), arithmetic mean error (AME), and percentage of eyes achieving refractive prediction errors (RPE) within ± 0.50 D, ± 0.75 D, and ± 1 D for each formula. A search of the literature was also performed by two independent reviewers based on relevant formulas. RESULTS: Overall, the best performing IOL power calculations were the Camellin-Calossi (MedAE = 0.515 D), the ASCRS average (MedAE = 0.535 D), and the EVO (MedAE = 0.545 D) and Kane (MedAE = 0.555 D) AI-based formulas. The EVO and Kane formulas along with the ASCRS calculation performed similarly, with 48.65% of eyes scoring within ± 0.50 D of the target range, while the Equivalent Keratometry Reading (EKR) 65 Holladay formula achieved the greatest percentage of eyes scoring within ± 0.25 D of the target range (35.14%). Additionally, the EVO 2.0 formula achieved 64.86% of eyes scoring within the ± 0.75 D RPE category, while the Kane formula achieved 75.68% of eyes scoring within the ± 1 D RPE category. There was no significant difference in MAE between the established and newer generation formulas (P > 0.05). The Panacea formula consistently underperformed when compared to the ASCRS average and other high-performing formulas (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the potential of AI-based IOL calculation formulas, such as EVO 2.0 and Kane, for improving the accuracy of IOL power calculation in post-RK eyes undergoing cataract surgery. Established calculations, such as the ASCRS and Barrett True K formula, remain effective options, while under-utilized formulas, like the EKR65 and Camellin-Calossi formulas, show promise, emphasizing the need for further research and larger studies to validate and enhance IOL power calculation for this patient group.

Comparative evaluation of multiple nomograms for predicting postoperative vault after implantable collamer lens surgery.

PURPOSE: To compare the vault predictability of most available implantable collamer lens (ICL) sizing nomograms and identify which preoperative measurements are predictive of vault. SETTING: Private practice in Draper, Utah. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of 209 eyes of 106 patients who underwent STAAR Surgical ICL implantation. Analyses were performed based on the availability of preoperative parameters, varying the number of eyes for each test. Mean absolute error (MAE) of predicted vs actual postoperative vault was calculated for each nomogram. The frequency of Kim, Rocamora (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator-optical coherence tomography), Russo, and Reinstein recommending the correct ICL size in instances when Parkhurst, optimized white-to-white (WTW), and STAAR could not recommend a definitive ICL size was determined. Univariate and multivariate linear regression analysis was performed between preoperative measurements and vault. RESULTS: The Kim, Rocamora, Russo, and Reinstein nomograms had significantly lower MAE of predicted vs actual postoperative vault than the KSV2 and Nakamura V3 nomograms. The Russo formula most frequently recommended the correct ICL size when the Parkhurst, Optimized WTW, and STAAR nomograms could not provide ICL size recommendations. At the 0.05 significance level, anterior chamber depth (ACD), ciliary body inner diameter (CBID), and pupil diameter were the parameters found to have significant correlation with postoperative vault. CONCLUSIONS: The Kim, Rocamora, Russo, and Reinstein nomograms were the most predictive of vault. Additionally, ACD, CBID, and pupil diameter were found to be significantly correlated with vault and should be considered for use in future ICL sizing nomograms.

Exploring Nomograms for Implantable Collamer Lens Size Selection in Myopia: A Literature-based Compilation.

Purpose: To provide a comprehensive guide of all implantable collamer lens (ICL) sizing nomograms and the respective preoperative diagnostic devices that are required. This guide would help clinicians in choosing the appropriate ICL size for myopic patients to optimize postoperative vault height. Methods: A literature search of peer-reviewed journals describing methods and postoperative outcomes of ICL sizing was conducted. Research articles containing ICL nomograms or formulas were identified from this search. Preoperative variables necessary for these nomograms and the required diagnostic devices to measure these parameters such as topography, biometry, or ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM) were noted. An additional search was conducted to identify artificial intelligence (AI) or machine learning (ML)-derived nomograms. Results: Eighteen ICL sizing nomograms were identified through literature search. Five of these nomograms are available for use and require topography or biometry devices. Of these, four include the manufacturer's, optimized white-to-white (WTW), Kang, Kim, and Rocamora Nomograms. Eight of the 18 nomograms available for use require UBM. Eight of these include the Kojima, Nakamura, KS, ZZ, Dougherty, Parkhurst, Russo, and Reinstein Nomograms. Four of the 18 nomograms are ML-derived including Shen, Rocamora, Russo, and Kang Nomograms. Conclusion: ICL nomograms are a vital tool in helping clinicians select the right ICL size for myopic patients to optimize postoperative vault reducing risk of postoperative complications. Based on available diagnostic devices such as topography, biometry, or UBM clinicians can integrate specific nomograms into practice.

Incidence and Management of Epithelial-Related Complications After SMILE.

Purpose: To investigate the incidence and management of only epithelial-related complications following small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). Patients and Methods: A retrospective, single-site study analyzed patients who underwent SMILE at Hoopes Vision Clinic in Draper, Utah, from June 2017 to February 2023. Demographic data and preoperative parameters were reviewed. Postoperatively, patients were assessed for visual acuity and complications at different time points. Statistical analyses were conducted between the control and complication groups. Results: Four hundred and thirty-two eyes of 220 patients received SMILE. Postoperative epithelial-related complications were indicated in 68 (15.7%) eyes, including anterior basement membrane (ABM) changes (five [1.2%]) eyes), epithelial ingrowth (nine [2.1%] eyes), erosion (two [0.5%] eyes), rough epithelium (18 [4.2%] eyes), epithelial defect (12 [2.8%] eyes), diffuse lamellar keratitis (DLK) secondary to epitheliopathy (two [0.5%] eyes), microstriae secondary to epitheliopathy (four [0.9%] eyes), interface debris (21 [4.9%] eyes), and incisional fibrosis (one [0.2%] eye). There was a statistically significant difference in age, with older patients more likely to develop epitheliopathy postoperatively (P = 0.001). Additionally, patients with epithelial-related complications were more likely to receive photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) enhancement after SMILE than the control (P = 0.001). However, there was no statistical difference in uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) better than 20/20 and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) between the complications group and the control at the last postoperative visit (P = 0.974 and 0.310, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in the safety and efficacy indices between the complications and control group (P = 0.281 and 0.617, respectively). Conclusion: In our study, epithelial-related complications were more prevalent in older patients and predisposed patients to require PRK enhancements after recovery from SMILE. Despite the incidence of epithelial-related complications, visual prognoses were favorable and achieved through various management strategies.

Management of Corneal Haze After Photorefractive Keratectomy.

Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) is a safe and popular corneal surgery performed worldwide. Nevertheless, there is potential risk of corneal haze development after surgery. Proper management of post PRK haze is important for good visual outcome. We performed a comprehensive review of the literature on the various risk factors and treatments for PRK haze, searching the PubMed, Google Scholar, SCOPUS, ScienceDirect, and Embase databases using relevant search terms. All articles in English from August 1989 through April 2023 were reviewed for this study, among which 102 articles were chosen to be included in the study. Depending on the characteristics of and examination findings on post PRK haze, different management options may be preferred. In the proposed framework, management of PRK haze should include a full workup that includes patient's subjective complaints and loss of vision as well as visual acuity, biomicroscopy, anterior segment optical coherence tomography, epithelial mapping, and Scheimpflug densitometry. Topical steroid treatment for haze should be stratified based on early- or late-onset haze. Mechanical debridement or superficial phototherapeutic keratectomy (PTK) may be used to treat superficial corneal haze. Deep PTK and/or PRK can be used to treat deep corneal haze. Mitomycin-C and topical steroids are prophylactic post-surgery agents to prevent recurrence of haze.

Comparing the Effectiveness of Smartphone Applications in the Measurement of Interpupillary Distance.

Purpose To determine the accuracy of three smartphone applications in the measurement of interpupillary distance (IPD). Methods This study compared measurements from three smartphone applications to measurements obtained by a single trained examiner using a digital pupilometer in 44 subjects. The mean absolute error (MAE) of IPD prediction by each application was compared. Additionally, the frequency at which each application measured IPD within ± 0.05 mm, ± 0.10 mm, ± 0.25 mm, ± 0.50 mm, ± 0.75 mm, and ± 1.00 mm of the digital pupilometer measurement was determined. Results The Eye Measure (Dotty Digital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia) and Warby Parker (Warby Parker, New York, New York) applications had significantly lower MAE of IPD measurements (0.511364 mm) compared to the PDCheck AR (EyeQue Corp., Newark, California) application (1.375 mm). The Warby Parker application most frequently obtained accurate IPD measurements within the following ranges: ± 0.05 mm, ± 0.10 mm, ± 0.25 mm, ± 0.50 mm, ± 0.75 mm, and ± 1.00 mm. Conclusion Of the three smartphone applications compared in this study, the Warby Parker application performed to the highest degree of accuracy and may serve as an adequate alternative when conventional IPD measurement methods are either unavailable or unable to be performed accurately.

A Literature Review of the Incidence, Management, and Prognosis of Corneal Epithelial-Related Complications After Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis (LASIK), Photorefractive Keratectomy (PRK), and Small Incision Lenticule Extraction (SMILE).

Our purpose is to provide a comprehensive investigation into the incidence, treatment modalities, and visual prognosis of epithelial-related complications in corneal refractive surgeries, including laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), photorefractive keratectomy (PRK), and small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). A systematic search of multiple databases was conducted by two independent examiners using various search terms related to epithelial-related complications and corneal refractive surgeries. A total of 91 research articles were included, encompassing a sample size of 66,751 eyes across the three types of surgeries. The average incidence of epithelial-related complications varied across the different types of corneal refractive surgeries. LASIK had an average incidence of 4.9% for epithelial defects, while PRK and SMILE had lower rates of 3.3% and 3.9%, respectively. Our findings indicate that SMILE has a lower incidence of epithelial defects compared to LASIK, potentially due to the less invasive nature of lenticule incision in SMILE. Visual prognosis after epithelial complications (EC) is generally favorable, with various supportive care and surgical interventions leading to significant improvements in postoperative visual acuity and full recovery. Understanding the incidence rates and management approaches for epithelial-related complications can guide clinicians in enhancing patient safety, refining surgical techniques, and optimizing postoperative outcomes in corneal refractive surgeries.

Assessment of Pupil Size and Angle Kappa in Refractive Surgery: A Population-Based Epidemiological Study in Predominantly American Caucasians.

Purpose This retrospective study aims to establish normative values for pupil size, angle kappa, higher-order aberration, and astigmatism type in a largely Caucasian population in Utah, United States, utilizing the NIDEK OPD-Scan III system (Gamagori, Japan). Methods This study included 716 patients (1432 eyes) grouped based on spherical equivalence and age. Measurements were conducted under mesopic and photopic conditions. Statistical analysis involved Pearson's correlation and linear regression using the generalized estimating equation. NIDEK OPD-Scan III measured mesopic and photopic pupil size and angle kappa. The subjects were then grouped based on their spherical equivalence in diopters (D) and age in decades. The spherical equivalence groups were defined: >-6 D, -5.99 to -3 D, -2.99 to -0.25 D, -0.24 to 0.24 D, and >0.25 D (range 0.25-5.75 D). The higher-order aberration groups were based on the reason for the visit: laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis, photorefractive keratectomy, and small incision lenticule extraction as one group; cataract evaluation; and keratoconus. Astigmatism measurements were grouped into with-the-rule (WRT), against-the-rule (ATR), and oblique astigmatism, with further subgrouping into a young cohort (20-40 years) and an old cohort (>65 years).  Results Among 716 participants, 49.2% were men; the mean age was 42.1±15.5 (range 7-88 years). The average spherical equivalence for myopia eyes was -3.28±2.34 D, and 1.51±1.46 D for hyperopia eyes. The mean mesopic pupil size was 5.68 ± 1.09 mm; the photopic pupil size was 4.65±1.09 mm. Pearson's correlation coefficient for mesopic pupil size versus age was -0.551, and -0.42 for photopic pupil (p < 0.001); sphere vs mesopic pupil size was -0.200, and -0.173 for photopic pupil (p < 0.001). The regression analysis for mesopic pupil size versus age revealed a 0.39 mm decrease in average pupil size per decade increase in age, and 0.25 mm decrease per decade for photopic pupil. The regression analysis for mesopic pupil size versus sphere revealed a 0.22 mm decrease in average pupil size per 3D increase in sphere, and a 0.16 mm decrease 3 D increase in sphere for the photopic pupil. The mean mesopic angle kappa was 0.33 ± 0.15 mm; photopic angle kappa was 0.31±0.15 mm. Pearson's correlation coefficient for mesopic angle kappa vs spherical equivalence was 0.32, and 0.296 for photopic angle kappa (p <0.001 for both). Regression analysis for mesopic angle kappa vs spherical equivalence demonstrated a 0.051 mm increase in angle kappa per 3 D increase in spherical equivalence, and a 0.048 mm increase for photopic angle kappa (p < 0.001 for both). Among the higher-order aberration groups, the keratoconus group exhibited the highest levels. In terms of astigmatism type, WRT astigmatism was the most common in the young cohort, while ATR astigmatism was most prevalent in the older cohort. Conclusions The results of this study reveal significant associations between pupil size and increasing age, as well as between pupil size and increasingly positive refractive errors. These findings hold particular clinical relevance to older patients and individuals with hyperopia, as they undergo photoablative corneal refractive surgery or multifocal intraocular lens implantation. Understanding the established normative values for pupil size, angle kappa, higher-order aberration, and astigmatism type can aid clinicians in making more informed decisions and improving patient outcomes.

Artificial Intelligence in Ophthalmology: A Comparative Analysis of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and Human Expertise in Answering StatPearls Questions.

Importance Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT) has shown promising performance in various fields, including medicine, business, and law, but its accuracy in specialty-specific medical questions, particularly in ophthalmology, is still uncertain. Purpose This study evaluates the performance of two ChatGPT models (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4) and human professionals in answering ophthalmology questions from the StatPearls question bank, assessing their outcomes, and providing insights into the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) technology in ophthalmology. Methods ChatGPT's performance was evaluated using 467 ophthalmology questions from the StatPearls question bank. These questions were stratified into 11 subcategories, four difficulty levels, and three generalized anatomical categories. The answer accuracy of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and human participants was assessed. Statistical analysis was conducted via the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for normality, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the statistical significance of GPT-3 versus GPT-4 versus human performance, and repeated unpaired two-sample t-tests to compare the means of two groups. Results GPT-4 outperformed both GPT-3.5 and human professionals on ophthalmology StatPearls questions, except in the "Lens and Cataract" category. The performance differences were statistically significant overall, with GPT-4 achieving higher accuracy (73.2%) compared to GPT-3.5 (55.5%, p-value < 0.001) and humans (58.3%, p-value < 0.001). There were variations in performance across difficulty levels (rated one to four), but GPT-4 consistently performed better than both GPT-3.5 and humans on level-two, -three, and -four questions. On questions of level-four difficulty, human performance significantly exceeded that of GPT-3.5 (p = 0.008). Conclusion The study's findings demonstrate GPT-4's significant performance improvements over GPT-3.5 and human professionals on StatPearls ophthalmology questions. Our results highlight the potential of advanced conversational AI systems to be utilized as important tools in the education and practice of medicine.

Allogenic Lenticular Implantation for Correction of Refractive Error and Ectasia: Narrative Review.

INTRODUCTION: Intrastromal lenticule implantation is a promising treatment option for corneal pathologies, from refractive error to ectasia. In this narrative review, we intend to feature up-to-date literature supporting the use of lenticular tissue, a compelling method that can be customized for a variety of applications, providing an additional source of donor tissue for treating corneal diseases. METHODS: We searched databases PubMed, Mendeley, and Scopus last accessed 10 May 2023, for literature on stromal lenticules and narrowed based on relevance. Review articles, animal studies, ex vivo studies, and book chapters were excluded, while assessable and relevant articles published in English were included. RESULTS: Storage methods from using fresh lenticules to dehydration have proven successful, with cryopreservation maintaining structure and cellular viability for up to 10 years. Successful use of lenticules for treatment of numerous pathologies including corneal ectasias, hyperopia, and presbyopia with additional insight into the treatment of corneal ulcers and perforations are highlighted in this narrative review. CONCLUSION: Lenticular implantation is an innovative and advantageous treatment for various ocular pathologies, offering increased bioavailability, flexibility, and customization for patients. They can treat previously untreatable diseases and serve as a replacement for synthetic implants, with promising outcomes worldwide. Lenticular implantation has the potential to become a leading approach in ophthalmologic surgery. Further studies should aim to provide evidentiary support for a standardization of lenticule banking.

Assessing Visual Outcomes: A Comparative Study of US-FDA Premarket Approval Data for Multifocal and EDOF Lens Implants in Cataract Surgery.

This study compares the efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes of three intraocular implants (IOL): Tecnis Synergy IOL, AcrySof IQ PanOptix Trifocal, and Tecnis Symfony EDOF IOL. Participants achieving 20/20 or better uncorrected binocular visual acuity were as follows: Synergy-67% distance, 64% intermediate, and 47% near; PanOptix-73% distance, 73% intermediate, and 50% near; and Symfony-63% distance, 75% intermediate, and 22% near. Symfony demonstrated superior intermediate visual acuity compared to Synergy (p = 0.0182) for those achieving 20/25 or better. Both Synergy and PanOptix showed superiority over Symfony for near visual acuity (p < 0.0001). Halos were statistically more common in Synergy participants compared to PanOptix (p = 0.0013) and Symfony (p < 0.0001). Each trial lens outperformed its monofocal IOL in terms of independence from glasses or contacts, with Synergy and PanOptix showing statistical significance over Symfony. Comparing contrast sensitivities and defocus curves was challenging due to data variance and as such, standardization of United States Food and Drug Administration (US-FDA) data reporting is key for better comparison of outcomes among different IOL platforms.