Clinical Outcomes of Enhanced Monofocal (Mono-EDOF) Intraocular Lenses with the Mini-Monovision Technique versus Trifocal Intraocular Lenses: A Comparative Study.

Objectives: It was aimed to compare the clinical results of the mini-monovision technique (MMV) with enhanced monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) and trifocal IOL applications and to evaluate the intereye differences in the MMV group. Materials and Methods: This retrospective observational study evaluated the results of cataract surgeries performed on 48 eyes of 24 patients. Surgeries in Group I were performed for MMV using the RayOne EMV IOL targeting emmetropia in dominant eyes (Group IA) and -0.70 diopter (D) myopia in non-dominant eyes (Group IB), while those in Group II were performed with the AcrySof® IQ PanOptixTM TNFT00 IOL targeting emmetropia. After the surgeries, uncorrected and corrected distance, intermediate, and near distance visual acuities, contrast sensitivity measurements, and defocus curves were determined. Subjective evaluation was made with the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25). The groups were compared statistically. Results: Postoperative refraction mean spherical equivalent was -0.25±0.22 D, -0.67±0.33 D, and -0.16±0.31 D in the three groups, respectively. A statistical difference was identified in favor of Group IA for uncorrected distance vision and in favor of Group IB for near vision (p<0.05). There was no difference in bilateral uncorrected visions in Groups I and II (p>0.05). While contrast sensitivity was better in Group I at all spatial frequencies (p<0.05), better vision was achieved in the defocus curve at distance in Group IA and at near in Group IB. In the binocular evaluation, it was seen that Groups I and II had similar results. In the subjective evaluation, NEI-VFQ-25 scores were 94.1±4.2/100 in Group I and 91.5±3.0/100 in Group II at 6 months (p>0.05). Photic complaints were significantly more common in Group II. Conclusion: With the MMV technique, it was observed that enhanced monofocal lenses provided better visual acuity at all distances and less dysphotopsia than trifocal lenses, whereas trifocal lenses were better at providing independence from glasses.

Comparison of visual efficacy and patient's satisfaction between two toric IOLs, enhanced for intermediate vision and monofocal.

BACKGROUND: To compare the visual efficacy and patient satisfaction between 2 toric IOLs (TIOL), enhanced for intermediate vision or monofocal. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of 100 eyes from 68 astigmatic patients who underwent cataract surgery with implantation of a Tecnis Eyhance Toric II IOL (Johnson & Johnson Vision, Irvine, CA, USA) (Group 1, 50 eyes) or Tecnis TIOL (Group 2, 50 eyes). The uncorrected distant (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA), and near (UNVA) visual acuities; residual refractive astigmatism; defocus curve; and IOL axis rotation were evaluated at 1 week, 1 month, 2 months, and 3 months postoperatively. RESULTS: The postoperative UDVA and UNVA refractive astigmatism values of the two groups were better than the preoperative measurements (P < 0.05), but there was no statistical difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). The postoperative UIVA of group 1 (0.18 ± 0.15 logMAR) was significantly better than that of group 2 (0.30 ± 0.25) (P < 0.05). The mean postoperative IOL rotation of group 1 (2.51 ± 0.79°) was lower than that of group 2 (3.02 ± 0.84°) (P < 0.05). Overall satisfaction of group 1 (1.27 ± 0.47) was better than that of group 2 (2.02 ± 0.53) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The Tecnis Eyhance Toric II IOL demonstrated less postoperative IOL rotation and excellent uncorrected intermediate vision compared with the Tecnis TIOL. Near visual acuity and overall satisfaction with the Tecnis Eyhance Toric II IOL were also higher than those with the Tecnis TIOL.

Risk stratification for central lymph node metastasis in mono-focal papillary thyroid carcinoma patients with encapsulated tumor as confirmed by preoperative ultrasound: a multi-center analysis.

PURPOSES: Mono-focal papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) patients with encapsulated tumor have traditionally been considered as low central lymph node metastasis (CLNM) risk subgroup. The aim of the research was to quantitatively predict the probability of CLNM for mono-focal PTC patients with encapsulated tumor as confirmed by preoperative ultrasound based on pre- and post-operative indexes respectively to guide the selection of prophylactic central lymph node dissection (CLND) and follow-up strategies. METHODS: A total of 1014 mono-focal PTC patients with encapsulated tumor as confirmed by preoperative ultrasound from three medical centers were retrospectively analyzed, with 534 patients served as Training group and 480 patients as Validation group. RESULTS: Multivariate analyses showed that age < 55 years old, male, clinical maximum tumor diameter (cMTD) > 0.5 cm, pathological maximum tumor diameter (pMTD) > 0.5 cm, and the presence of microscopic thyroid capsular invasion (mTCI) were independent CLNM risk factors. These were used to construct two nomograms that can effectively predict the central neck involvement in mono-focal PTC patients with encapsulated tumor. The first nomogram (pre-model) provides quantitative assessment on the necessity of prophylactic CLND, while the second nomogram (post-model) informs postoperative follow-up strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Meticulous and comprehensive stratification flow charts that quantitatively evaluate the risk of central lymph node metastasis both pre- and post-operatively were constructed for mono-focal PTC patients with encapsulated tumor as confirmed by preoperative ultrasound, which may benefit both clinical decision-making of prophylactic CLND and postoperative follow-up strategies for the management of neck regions.

[Optical benchtop evaluation of special intraocular lens optics]. / Optische Bank-Evaluierung für spezielle Intraokularlinsenoptiken.

Intraocular lenses (IOL) featuring complex optical designs can pose a challenge in understanding their performance, which may hinder making an informed decision when selecting suitable lenses for patients. This underlines the importance of collecting optical quality data of IOLs and making them available. The deployment of benchtop systems for IOL testing offers not only insights into the design features of various IOL solutions but also provides a platform for objective comparisons of special optics designs, including information about their susceptibility to photic phenomena. Recent advances in IOL testing have improved the ability to predict functional effects on visual acuity and contrast sensitivity from objective optical quality metrics. This, for instance, can be used to study monofocal lenses and the impact of asphericity on vision and IOLs tolerance to misalignment. Monofocal-plus IOLs consistently show only a slight improvement in the depth of focus when tested on the optical bench and in clinical settings. Although the pupil dependence found in this technology may limit the advantages of monofocal-plus over standard monofocal technology to extend the range of vision, it is the key to reduce photic phenomena. Refractive and diffractive extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOLs can effectively enhance intermediate vision, with the latter offering a slightly broader depth of focus but potentially increasing the risk of dysphotopsia. However, the limitation of EDOF IOLs is that they often fail to deliver spectacle independence for reading, which can be overcome by trifocal technology. Still, the available trifocal IOLs differ in their location of intermediate and near foci and the susceptibility to produce glare effects. Therefore, the knowledge from optical benchtop testing of IOLs can support optimizing the IOL selection by aligning the patient's visual needs with the IOL's properties, setting the right expectations, and assessing the risk profile for the occurrence of photic phenomena, potentially leading to improved decision-making.

[Overview of intraocular lenses with optics for correcting presbyopia]. / Übersicht über Intraokularlinsen mit Presbyopie-korrigierenden Optiken.

BACKGROUND: In recent years intraocular lenses (IOLs) for correcting presbyopia have been significantly improved and diversified. There are currently many different IOL models based on a wide variety of optical designs. OBJECTIVE: The wide variety of available IOL solutions to correct presbyopia can be challenging for surgeons and patients. In everyday practice, the question is which IOL is best for which patient. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This overview describes and categorizes the currently available implants. The respective optical properties are analyzed and clinical study results are discussed, in particular those evaluating visual performance and the occurrence of photic phenomena. RESULTS: Monofocal-plus IOLs provide improved intermediate visual acuity with optimal distant visual acuity and minimal photic phenomena. Extended depth of field (EDoF) IOLs extend the depth of field through different optical principles and provide good distant and intermediate visual acuity. Trifocal lenses enable the greatest independence from spectacles at the price of a higher probability of dysphotopsia. CONCLUSION: The selection of the most suitable IOL for correction of presbyopia requires a balance between the patient's visual needs and possible side effects. An adequate knowledge of the currently available implants allows a patient-oriented selection of IOLs.

Impact of Aspheric Monofocal Intraocular Lens Implantation on Uncorrected Intermediate Visual Acuity: a Combined Analysis.

Purpose: To evaluate binocular intermediate visual acuity (IVA), depth of focus, and other visual outcomes achieved with a monofocal aspheric intraocular lens (IOL) using pooled data from 2 randomized, double-masked, controlled trials. Patients and Methods: The studies conducted at 32 sites included patients aged ≥22 years with bilateral cataracts, preoperative corneal astigmatism 1.0 D, and lens power 18.0-25.0 D. Patients received bilateral AcrySof IQ IOLs (SN60WF). Primary endpoint data were collected at month 6. Binocular uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA and CDVA) at 4 m, binocular uncorrected and corrected IVA (UIVA and DCIVA) at 66 cm, manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE), and binocular defocus curve at 4 m were assessed under photopic conditions. Validated questionnaires were used to assess spectacle use and quality of vision. Results: Of 233 patients who received SN60WF, 228 had visual acuity data at 6 months. Under photopic conditions, 51% of the eyes had pupils >4 mm, 40% had pupils 3-4 mm, and 9% had pupils <3 mm. Mean ± SD UDVA and CDVA were -0.019 ± 0.110 and -0.088 ± 0.082 logMAR, respectively. Mean ± SD UIVA and DCIVA were 0.125 ± 0.145 and 0.196 ± 0.139 logMAR, respectively. UIVA and DCIVA of 20/32 or better were achieved by 83% (188/228) and 71% (162/228) of patients, respectively. Mean ± SD MRSE was -0.007 ± 0.404 D for the first eye and 0.036 ± 0.371 for the second eye. The defocus curve demonstrated binocular vision of 0.24 logMAR or better from +1.2 to -1.5 D. Spectacle independence for distance and intermediate vision was reported by 86% and 41% of the patients, respectively. Based on questionnaires, 61%, 79%, and 65% of the patients did not experience starbursts, halos, or glare. Conclusion: A monofocal aspheric IOL (SN60WF) assessed in a large, pooled study provided excellent distance vision and clinically functional intermediate vision.

Five-Year Incidence of Nd:YAG Capsulotomy After Cataract Surgery with Different Single-Piece Monofocal Intraocular Lenses: A Follow-Up Study of 3955 Eyes.

Purpose: To estimate the incidence of neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet laser (Nd:YAG) capsulotomy up to five years after cataract surgery with different single-piece acrylic monofocal IOLs in a Spanish cohort. Patients and Methods: Data were extracted from electronic medical records. Eligible participants were aged ≥65, had cataract surgery with one of five different acrylic monofocal IOLs (Alcon AcrySof, AJL LLASY60, Medicontur Bi-flex, IOL Tech Stabibag and Zeiss Asphina), and more than six months baseline data. Participants were followed up to five years from surgery and up to six months from Nd:YAG. The incidence of Nd:YAG was compared between the IOLs and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify predictors of Nd:YAG incidence at five-years after cataract surgery. Results: The initial cohort included 9545 patients with 14,519 eyes (53% female, average age 75 years). Of those, 3955 eyes were available for analysis five years after cataract surgery. Throughout the five years post-surgery, Nd:YAG incidence was consistently lower with Alcon Acrysof IOLs than the other IOLs. At five years the Nd:YAG incidence rate for Alcon Acrysof was 8.8%. In comparison, the incidence was 47.4% for AJL LLASY60 (OR = 9.54, 95% CI [6.57, 13.84]), 44.3% for Zeiss Asphina (OR = 8.35, 95% CI [5.85, 11.94]) and 44.0% for IOL Tech Stabibag (OR = 8.02, 95% CI [4.60, 13.84]). Conclusion: Alcon AcrySof IOLs have a consistently lower risk of Nd:YAG incidence over a long follow-up period after cataract surgery, highlighting the importance of IOL choice for patients' long-term outcomes.

Managing dissatisfaction after multifocal intraocular lens implantation through lens exchange using monofocal or alternative multifocal IOLs.

PURPOSE: To manage patient dissatisfaction following multifocal intraocular lens (MF-IOL) implantation by IOL exchange with either a monofocal or an alternative MF-IOL, and to compare outcomes in these two groups. METHODS: MF-IOL exchange was performed in 32 patients (64 eyes) with neuroadaptation failure. The MF-to-MF group involved patients who had a MF-IOL exchanged with another MF-IOL of a different optical profile and the MF-to-MO group involved patients who had a MF-IOL exchanged to a monofocal IOL. Visual outcomes and complications were analysed. The Quality of Vision (QoV) questionnaire, Visual Function Index (VF-14) and its Rasch-revised version (VF-8R) were also used to assess outcomes. RESULTS: There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in the QoV scores between the two groups, both preoperatively and postoperatively. Preoperatively, there were no significant differences in VF-14 scores between both groups (p > 0.05). Postoperatively, there were statistically significant differences in VF-14 (total score, intermediate vision and near vision) in favour of the MF-to-MF group (p < 0.05). The postoperative VF-8R score in the MF-to-MF group was significantly better than the MF-to-MO group (p ≤ 0.001). Uncorrected and corrected near as well as corrected distance visual acuities were significantly better (p < 0.05) in the MF-to-MF group compared to the MF-to-MO group at 3 months. CONCLUSION: Patient dissatisfaction and neuroadaptation failure following MF-IOL implantation can be managed by an IOL exchange with an alternative optical design of MF-IOL or a monofocal IOL. Although, in the current study, the MF-to-MF group showed some better postoperative results, both options are feasible solutions.

Comparative Analysis of Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes of a New Enhanced Monofocal IOL and a Conventional Monofocal IOL.

Purpose: To compare the outcomes of the Tecnis Eyhance ICB00 IOL, designed to enhance intermediate vision, to a conventional Tecnis Monofocal ZCB00 IOL. Methods: This retrospective analysis compared two cohorts of patients undergoing lens replacement surgery with bilateral implantation of the Tecnis ICB00 or the Tecnis ZCB00 IOL (383 patients in each group). Monocular and binocular uncorrected distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA; 66cm), and near (UNVA; 40cm) visual acuities, refractive predictability, and patient-reported outcomes were compared. A sub-analysis of patients with the Eyhance IOL was performed to compare patients who achieved bilateral emmetropia to those with mini-monovision. One-month postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Results: Both groups had comparable UDVA outcomes. On average, both monocular and binocular UIVAs were approximately one Snellen line better in patients implanted with Eyhance IOL (monocular UIVA: ICB00 0.23 ± 0.18 logMAR, ZCB00 0.33 ± 0.19 logMAR; binocular UIVA: ICB00 0.18 ± 0.18 logMAR, ZCB00 0.26 ± 0.20 logMAR, p < 0.01). Likewise, the mean UNVA was also one Snellen line better with the ICB00 model (monocular UNVA: ICB00 0.51 ± 0.20 logMAR, ZCB00 0.61 ± 0.18 logMAR; binocular UNVA: ICB00 0.42 ± 0.19 logMAR, ZCB00 0.51 ± 0.22 logMAR, p < 0.01). There was no difference between the two groups in overall satisfaction or visual phenomena. A subgroup of patients who achieved mini-monovision with Eyhance IOL had, on average, one Snellen line better UIVA and UNVA compared to patients with bilateral emmetropia. Conclusion: Patients receiving the enhanced monofocal IOL had better intermediate and near vision compared to those receiving the conventional monofocal IOL, with similar levels of patient-reported photic phenomena in both groups.

Systematic review for the development of a core outcome set for monofocal intraocular lenses for cataract surgery.

Introduction: The aim of the study was to define a core outcome set (COS) to be measured following cataract surgery for the postoperative evaluation of monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). Compared to current COSs, the present work provides updates considering the advances in the technology due to the development of new generation monofocal IOLs, which are characterized by a safety profile comparable to standard monofocal IOLs but with an extended range of intermediate vision. Methods: Healthcare professionals (ophthalmologist surgeons) and patients were involved in the selection of outcomes to be included in the COS, starting from a list of indicators retrieved from a systematic literature search. The search considered observational studies with both a retrospective or prospective design, case studies and classic randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A mixed methodology integrating a Delphi-driven and an expert panel approach was adopted to reach an agreement among clinicians, while patients were involved in the completion of a questionnaire. Results: The final COS included 15 outcomes. Eleven outcomes, all clinical, were considered for inclusion after a joint discussion among ophthalmologists; seven outcomes were linked to visual acuity, while the remaining to contrast sensitivity, refractive errors, aberrations and adverse events. Measurement metrics, method of aggregation and measurement time point of these outcomes were specified. The most important aspects for the patients were (1) quality of life after cataract surgery, (2) the capacity to perform activities requiring good near vision (e.g., reading), (3) spectacle independence, and (4) safety of movements without fear of getting hurt or falling (intermediate vision). Discussion: In a context with limited healthcare resources, it is important to optimize their use considering also the preferences of end-users, namely patients. The proposed COS, developed involving both ophthalmologists and patients, provides an instrument for the postoperative evaluation of different technologies in the context of monofocal IOLs, which can be used not only in clinical trials but also in clinical practice to increase the body of real-world evidence.

Rotational stability of monofocal and diffractive multifocal toric intraocular lens with identical design and material: a propensity score based prospective comparative study.

PURPOSE: To compare the rotational stability of a monofocal and a diffractive multifocal toric intraocular lens(IOLs) with identical design and material. METHODS: This prospective study enrolled patients who underwent plate-haptic toric IOL (AT TORBI 709 M and AT LISA 909 M) implantation. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance baseline factors. Follow-up examinations were conducted at 1 h, 1 day, 3 days, 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively. A linear mixed model of repeated measures was used to investigate the changes in IOL rotation over time. A 2-week timeframe was utilized to assess differences in IOL rotation between the two groups. RESULT: After PSM, a total of 126 eyes were selected from each group for further analysis. Postoperatively, the time course of IOL rotation change in the two groups remained consistent, with the greatest rotation occurring between 1 h and 1 day postoperatively. At the 2-week postoperative mark, the monofocal toric IOL exhibited a higher degree of rotation compared to the multifocal toric IOL (5.40 ± 7.77° vs. 3.53 ± 3.54°, P = 0.015). In lens thickness(LT) ≥ 4.5 mm and white-to-white distance(WTW) ≥ 11.6 mm subgroups, the monofocal toric IOL rotated greater than the multifocal toric IOL (P = 0.026 and P = 0.011, respectively). CONCLUSION: The diffractive multifocal toric IOL exhibits superior rotational stability compared to the monofocal toric IOL, especially in subgroups LT ≥ 4.5 mm and WTW ≥ 11.6 mm. Moreover, the time course of IOL rotation change is consistent for both, with the maximum rotation occurring between 1 h and 1 day postoperatively.

Optical and aberrometric evaluation of a new enhanced monofocal intraocular lens with isofocal optic design.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the optical and aberrometric outcomes of an enhanced monofocal intraocular lens (ISOPure) compared with those of a standard monofocal lens (MicroPure) having the same platform and material. METHODS: A prospective, comparative and randomised clinical study. A total of 28 eyes of 28 patients were randomly assigned to either group. Monocular visual acuity (VA) was measured at distance and intermediate under photopic and mesopic conditions. Aberrometry was analysed for 3.0-, 4.0-, 4.5- and 5.0 mm pupils. The contrast sensitivity defocus curve was measured for 3.0- and 4.5-mm pupils, while the modulation transfer function (MTF) and Strehl ratio (SR) were assessed with a double-pass system. All measurements were performed monocularly 3 months after surgery. RESULTS: No significant differences were found for distance VA. Under photopic conditions, intermediate VA was better with the ISOPure lens, while no significant differences were found between the lenses under mesopic conditions. Internal and total aberrations were higher for the ISOPure lens. No significant differences were found for corneal aberrations. Additionally, both the contrast sensitivity defocus curve and optical quality showed similar behaviour for each lens, with the MTF cut-off frequency exceeding 30 c/deg in both cases. CONCLUSION: The isofocal ISOPure lens enhanced intermediate VA without affecting distance VA under photopic conditions. Moreover, there were no significant differences in visual quality between the ISOPure and MicroPure lenses, despite the former exhibiting higher internal and total aberrations than the monofocal model.

Ocular parameters associated with visual performance of enhanced monofocal intraocular lens.

BACKGROUND: An enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) (Tecnis Eyhance ICB00 and Tecnis Eyhance Toric DIU) has been developed to enhance intermediate vision while avoiding the disadvantages of multifocal IOLs. Although many studies have demonstrated the improvement of intermediate visual acuity with enhanced monofocal IOLs, it is not known specifically for which patients these IOLs should be recommended or avoided. In this study, we aim to find out which ocular parameters affect vision performance and photic phenomenon of ICB00 or DIU at different distances. METHODS: Patients who underwent cataract surgery with ICB00 or DIU, performed by a single surgeon, were included. Before surgery, the patients' age, gender, axial length, anterior chamber depth, spherical aberration Z (4,0), vertical coma, horizontal coma, angle kappa (κ), angle alpha (α), and other ocular parameters were investigated. One month after surgery, uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA at 40 cm), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA at 66 cm), uncorrected distance logMAR visual acuity (UDVA), IOL decentration, and quality of vision (QoV) questionnaires were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 43 patients (58 eyes) were included. The results of the univariate linear regression analyses showed a negative correlation between spherical aberration and logMAR UNVA and UIVA (p = 0.003, ß=-0.51 and p = 0.018, ß=-0.23, respectively) and a positive correlation between angle α and logMAR UIVA (p = 0.036, ß = 0.19). Deeper anterior chamber depth (ACD) was associated with poorer total QoV (p = 0.018, ß = 14.43), particularly in glare, halo, blur, and fluctuation perception. A higher degree of IOL decentration tended to decrease UNVA and UIVA (Pearson correlation coefficient, r = 0.336 and r = 0.221, respectively); however, no significant effect was observed on UDVA (Pearson correlation coefficient, r = 0.042). CONCLUSIONS: In enhanced monofocal IOLs, a higher level of spherical aberration is associated with better performance in UNVA and UIVA, whereas a larger angle α has a negative impact. A deeper ACD negatively affects the QoV.

Cataract surgery with new monofocal intraocular lens enhanced for intermediate vision and standard monofocal intraocular lens for retinal disorder.

AIM: To investigate the difference in the initial surgical results between a new monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) with enhanced intermediate vision and the standard monofocal IOL in patients with retinal disease. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with retinal disease who underwent cataract surgery due to accompanying cataracts. Types of retinal diseases were investigated and best-corrected distant visual acuity, distant uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), intermediate UCVA, near UCVA, and spherical equivalent were recorded at each visit. The surgical results were investigated at 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month after surgery. RESULTS: Seventeen eyes treated with a new monofocal IOL enhanced for intermediate vision (ICB00 group) and 18 eyes treated with the standard monofocal IOL (AAB00 group) were included in this study. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics, including the type of underlying retinal disease, between the groups. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of distant, intermediate, or near UCVA at day 1 and week 1 after surgery. However, at 1 month after surgery, the ICB00 group showed a significantly better intermediate vision improvement than the AAB00 group (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Even in patients with cataract accompanied by retinal disease, the use of the ICB00 IOL showed significant improvement in intermediate vision compared to the use of the AAB00 (standard monofocal) IOL. The ICB00 IOL might be a good option for patients with cataract and retinal disease in the era of increased intermediate vision needs in daily life.

Visual outcomes and patient satisfaction after bilateral implantation of an enhanced monofocal intraocular lens: a single-masked prospective randomized study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the visual outcomes of an enhanced monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) with two different monofocal IOLs. SETTING: Eye Clinic, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Health Sciences, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy. DESIGN: Prospective, single-center, single-masked, randomized controlled clinical study. METHODS: The study included patients undergoing phacoemulsification and IOL implantation. Patients were consecutively randomized by block randomization and assigned in a 1:1:1 allocation ratio to three study arms to bilaterally receive Tecnis Eyhance™ (model ICB00) or Tecnis® monofocal 1-piece (model PCB00) or Clareon® monofocal (model CNA0T0), respectively. Monocular and binocular (both corrected and uncorrected) visual acuities for far, intermediate and near were registered and compared among groups at 3 months. To track changes in patient quality of life, the Catquest-9SF questionnaire was administered to each patient before and after cataract extraction. RESULTS: Ninety patients (30 for each group) were enrolled. At 3 months follow-up, statistically significant differences for intermediate visual acuities were found between the three groups. Nonstatistically significant differences were observed for distance visual acuities and the changes in Catquest-9SF scores. CONCLUSION: Tecnis Eyhance™ provided better results in intermediate visual outcomes without adverse effects on patients' quality of life.

Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lenses in Fuchs' Endothelial Dystrophy Patients: Results from Triple Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Procedure.

PURPOSE: Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) is currently regarded as the most effective surgical procedure for addressing Fuchs Endothelial Corneal Dystrophy (FECD), frequently performed in conjunction with cataract surgery. In this retrospective study, we present a comparison of visual performance, clinical outcomes, and optical quality between two types of monofocal Intraocular Lenses (IOLs): one standard and one enhanced intermediate vision model, implanted in patients who underwent combined phacoemulsification and DMEK surgery. METHODS: This single center comparative retrospective study was conducted at the Eye Clinic of the University of Florence (Italy) and included a total of 48 eyes of 48 patients affected by FECD and cataract. All patients underwent combined DMEK with phacoemulsification procedures. The patients' data were analyzed and divided into two groups: one group (standard group) consisted of 24 eyes that underwent phaco-DMEK with implantation of a monofocal IOL, and the second group (enhanced monofocal group) included 24 eyes that underwent phaco-DMEK with implantation of an enhanced monofocal IOL. In both groups, the following monocular visual outcomes were evaluated 6 months after surgery: Uncorrected Distance Visual Acuity (UDVA) and Best-Corrected Distance Visual Acuity (BCDVA) at 4 mts; Uncorrected Intermediate Visual Acuity (UIVA), Distance-Corrected Intermediate Visual Acuity (DCIVA) at 66 cm; Uncorrected Near Visual Acuity (UNVA) and Best Corrected Near Visual Acuity (BCNVA). Monocular defocus curves were also assessed. Furthermore, optical quality in terms of Contrast Sensitivity (CS) in photopic conditions, Higher-Order Aberrations (HOAs) at a pupil size of 5 mm. Modulation Transfer Function (MTF), Objective Scatter Index (OSI), and Strehl ratio, were also analyzed. A Patient-Reported Spectacle Independence Questionnaire was revised to evaluate spectacle independence outcomes. RESULTS: the two groups did not exhibit statistically significant differences in terms of UDVA, BCDVA, UNVA and BCNVA, photopic CS, HOAs, OSI, Strehl ratio, and MTF. However, in the phaco-DMEK enhanced monofocal IOL group, significantly better results were observed in terms of UIVA and DCIVA as well as a different defocus curve profile at 1.50 D, providing better defocus results at intermediate distance compared with the ZCB00 IOL. CONCLUSION: In our study, we found that enhanced monofocal lens performed favorable visual outcomes, even in cases of FECD, compared to standard monofocal IOLs. Comparable optical quality observed in the Eyhance group could allow surgeons to consider these lenses as a viable option for selected patients with FECD.

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.

Tolerance to residual astigmatism of an isofocal intraocular lens.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of residual astigmatism on the optical and visual performance of an enhanced-monofocal isofocal intraocular lens (EM Isopure, BVI medical, Belgium) compared to a monofocal one (Micropure, BVI medical, Belgium). METHODS: Laboratory investigation and prospective, comparative and randomized clinical study. Optical quality was assessed on an optical bench for 2.0, 3.0, and 4.5 mm pupils. The effect of residual astigmatism was investigated from through-focus images recorded with increasing amounts of regular positive astigmatism induced with a deformable mirror. To evaluate the impact of residual astigmatism, 28 eyes of 28 patients were randomly assigned to either group. Residual astigmatism was induced with positive and negative cylinder lenses at 90 and 180°. Visual acuity (VA) was measured at each step. RESULTS: The optical performance of both IOLs was quite similar for 2.0 and 3.0 mm pupils. For 4.5-mm pupil, the EM Isopure showed a significant reduction of its optical quality in comparison with the monofocal IOL. When visual performance was evaluated, no statistically significant differences were found for any power of induced astigmatism. More differences were found when positive induced astigmatism was compared within each group, and VA was better when the astigmatism was induced at 180° vs. 90°. The greatest differences were found for and induced positive astigmatism of + 1.50D (p = 0.009 for Isopure and p = 0.023 for Micropure). CONCLUSIONS: The tolerance to residual astigmatism of the EM Isopure lens is similar to that of a reference monofocal lens with pupils up to 3.5 mm.

Toric Monofocal Intraocular Lenses for the Correction of Astigmatism during Cataract Surgery: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

PURPOSE: To review the published literature evaluating the visual and refractive outcomes and rotational stability of eyes implanted with toric monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) for the correction of keratometric astigmatism during cataract surgery and to compare those outcomes with outcomes of eyes implanted with nontoric monofocal IOLs and other astigmatism management methods performed during cataract surgery. This assessment was restricted to the toric IOLs available in the United States. METHODS: A literature search of English-language publications in the PubMed database was last conducted in July 2022. The search identified 906 potentially relevant citations, and after review of the abstracts, 63 were selected for full-text review. Twenty-one studies ultimately were determined to be relevant to the assessment criteria and were selected for inclusion. The panel methodologist assigned each a level of evidence rating; 12 studies were rated level I and 9 studies were rated level II. RESULTS: Eyes implanted with toric IOLs showed excellent postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCDVA), reduction of postoperative refractive astigmatism, and good rotational stability. Uncorrected distance visual acuity was better and postoperative cylinder was lower with toric IOLs, regardless of manufacturer, when compared with nontoric monofocal IOLs. Correcting pre-existing astigmatism with toric IOLs was more effective and predictable than using corneal relaxing incisions (CRIs), especially in the presence of higher magnitudes of astigmatism. CONCLUSIONS: Toric monofocal IOLs are effective in neutralizing pre-existing corneal astigmatism at the time of cataract surgery and result in better UCDVA and significant reductions in postoperative refractive astigmatism compared with nontoric monofocal IOLs. Toric IOLs result in better astigmatic correction than CRIs, particularly at high magnitudes of astigmatism. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Refractive Predictability between Standard and Total Keratometry during the Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery with Monofocal Intraocular Lens with Enhanced Intermediate Function.

PURPOSE: We aimed to compare the accuracy of the intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formula using the standard keratometry (K) and total K (TK) during the femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) with a monofocal IOL with enhanced intermediate function using currently used formulas. METHODS: A retrospective review of 125 eyes from 125 patients who had undergone FLACS with implantation of monofocal IOL with enhanced intermediate function was conducted. The predicted refractive power was calculated using an optical biometer (IOLmaster 700) according to the K and TK in the Barrett Universal II, SRK/T, Haigis, and Holladay 2 formulas. Absolute prediction error (APE) obtained from the actual postoperative refractive outcomes and the refractive error predicted in each formula was compared one month after surgery. RESULTS: Mean APE ranged between 0.29 and 0.39 diopters (D) regardless of the calculation formula and the method of measuring corneal curvature. Significant differences were observed in the APE from the four formulas and the two keratometric measurements (p = 0.014). In a total of 125 eyes from 125 patients, the mean APE was lowest with the Barrett Universal II formula. Across all formulas, both the mean APE and the median APE tended to be lower for K than for TK, although there was no significant difference. Approximately 70% to 80% of the patients were included within 0.5 D of the refractive error across all formulas. The percentage of eyes within 0.5 D of APE outcomes was not statistically different between the K and TK data when using each formula. CONCLUSIONS: Keratometric measurements considering the poster corneal curvature did not show any additional advantages when implanting the monofocal IOL with enhanced intermediate function during the FLACS.