Glaucoma medical treatment as a predictor of XEN45 subconjunctival gel implant hypotensive efficacy.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the preoperative characteristics influencing hypotensive efficacy of the XEN45 gel stent in patients with open-angle glaucoma at one-year follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective multicentre study. All patients who underwent XEN45 gel stent implantation between January 2017 and January 2021 were included. The main study outcome was the assessment of one-year postoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) and glaucoma medication differences according to the number and type of preoperative topical treatments or glaucoma surgery, glaucoma stage and time since diagnosis. Follow-up period was 1-year post-surgery in all cases. IOP reduction and surgery success (not requiring reoperation or pressure failures [IOP > 18 mmHg and < 20% reduction in IOP]), safety and cost savings in topical glaucoma therapy after surgery were secondarily assessed. Linear regression analysis to determine the preoperative parameters influence on 1-year postoperative results was performed. RESULTS: XEN45 gel stent was implanted in 85 patients. One-year postoperative mean IOP dropped from 20.6 ± 4.1 to 13.7 ± 2.8 mmHg (p < 0.0001). Likewise, mean number of topical treatments decreased from 2.05 ± 0.9 to 0.36 ± 0.65 (p < 0.001). Both were mainly influenced by the number of preoperative glaucoma treatments, such that for each one-glaucoma medication increase, postoperative intraocular pressure increased by 1.18 mmHg (95% CI 0.56-1.79, p < 0.0001) and number of glaucoma medications increased by 0.3 (95% CI 0.16-0.43, p < 0.001). Overall success rates (with and without supplemental glaucoma medication use) were 97.6% (95% CI 94.5-100%), 87.1% (95% CI 80.2-87.1%) and 61.2% (95% CI 51.6-72.5%) at 3, 6 months and 1 year after surgery. No sight-threatening adverse events were reported. Mean annual cost savings on medical treatment since surgery reached EUR 251.19 ± 169. 93 euros. CONCLUSIONS: One year after surgery, XEN45 gel implant significantly reduced IOP and number of topical medications with an adequate safety profile being both mainly influenced by the number of preoperative glaucoma treatments.

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.

Depth of field measures in pseudophakic eyes implanted with different type of presbyopia-correcting IOLS.

To evaluate depth of field (DOF) provided by different presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL) designs, comparing the results obtained using different criteria for defining the defocus tolerance. A total of 150 eyes undergoing cataract surgery were enrolled and divided into 6 groups depending on the IOL implanted: AT.LISA Tri (Carl Zeiss Meditec), FineVision (PhysIOL), PanOptix (Alcon Laboratories), Tecnis Symfony (Johnson & Johnson Vision), Miniwell (SIFI MedTech) and Tecnis Synergy (Johnson & Johnson Vision). Subjective DOF was obtained from defocus curves with absolute and relative criteria of tolerance of 0.1 logMAR. Aberrometry was also measured and the visual strehl optical transference function (VSOTF) with percentage of degradation of 90%, 80% and 60% was used to quantify objectively the DOF. Tecnis Symfony, Tecnis Synergy and Panoptix IOL groups showed better subjective and objective DOF compared to the rest of IOL groups, being these differences statistically significant differences (p < 0.001). Comparison between subjective and objective DOF showed that subjective measures were higher for all IOLs, being also these differences statistically significant for all groups (p < 0.001). A moderate significant correlation was found between absolute subjective criteria and VSOTF60% (r = 0.73, p < 0.05). Objective and subjective measures of DOF are not comparable due to differences in methodologies and criterions to define the level of degradation tolerance. Nevertheless, both objective and subjective measures showed a trend to a greater DOF for Tecnis Symfony and Tecnis Synergy IOLs compared to most of trifocal diffractive designs, with the exception of PanOptix.

Comparison of the accuracy of 11 intraocular lens power calculation formulas.

PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of 11 intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas (SRK-T, Hoffer Q, Holladay I, Haigis, Holladay II, Olsen, Barrett Universal II, Hill-RBF, Ladas Super formula, EVO and Kane). SETTING: Private university hospital (QuironSalud, Madrid, Spain). DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: Data were compiled from 481 eyes of 481 patients who had undergone uneventful cataract surgery with IOL insertion. Preoperative biometric measurements were made using an IOL Master® 700. Respective ULIB IOL constants (http://ocusoft.de/ulib/c1.htm) for each of 4 IOL models implanted were used to calculate the predictive refractive outcome for each formula. This was compared with the actual refractive outcome determined 3 months postoperatively. The primary outcome was mean absolute prediction error (MAE). The study sample was divided according to axial length (AL) into three groups of eyes: short (⩽22.00 mm), normal (22.00-25.00 mm) and long (⩾25.00 mm). RESULTS: The Barrett Universal II and Haigis formulas yielded the lowest MAEs over the entire AL range (p < .01, except EVO) as well as in the long (p < .01, all formulas) and normal (p < .01, except Haigis, Holladay II, Olsen and LSF) eyes. In the short eyes, the lower MAEs were provided by Haigis and EVO (p < .01 except Hoffer Q, SRK/T and Holladay I). CONCLUSIONS: Barrett Universal II was the most accurate for IOL power calculation in the normal and long eyes. For short eyes, the formulas Haigis and EVO seem best at predicting refractive outcomes.

Accuracy of a new intraocular lens power calculation method based on artificial intelligence.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to develop and assess the accuracy of a new intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation method based on machine learning techniques. METHODS: The following data were retrieved for 260 eyes of 260 patients undergoing cataract surgery: preoperative simulated keratometry, mean keratometry of posterior surface, axial length, anterior chamber depth, lens thickness, and white-to-white diameter; model and power of implanted IOL; and subjective refraction at 3 months post surgery. These data were used to train different machine learning models (k-Nearest Neighbor, Artificial Neural Networks, Support Vector Machine, Random Forest, etc). Implanted lens characteristics and biometric data were used as input to predict IOL power and refractive outcomes. For external validation, a dataset of 52 eyes was used. The accuracy of the trained models was compared with that of the power formulas Holladay 2, Haigis, Barrett Universal II, and Hill-RBF v2.0. RESULTS: The SD of the prediction error in order of lowest to highest was the new method (designated Karmona) (0.30), Haigis (0.36), Holladay 2 (0.38), Barrett Universal II (0.38), and Hill-RBF v2.0 (0.40). Using the Karmona method, 90.38% and 100% of eyes were within ±0.50 and ±1.00 D respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The method proposed emerged as the most accurate to predict IOL power.

Spectacle Independence for Pseudophakic Patients - Experience with a Trifocal Supplementary Add-on Intraocular Lens.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the refractive and functional outcomes of the trifocal 1stQ AddOn® (Medicontur) supplementary intraocular lenses (IOLs) designed for implantation into the ciliary sulcus. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 18 eyes of 11 pseudophakic patients with uncomplicated previous implantation of monofocal capsular bag IOLs. These patients had a desire for spectacle independence. Distance, intermediate and near visual acuities were measured, and defocus curves were plotted over a period of 6 months following implantation of the add-on IOLs. Intraocular pressure (IOP), endothelial cell density measurements and biomicroscopic evaluation were also performed. RESULTS: In this study, 83.3% of eyes had spherical refractions within ±0.5 D from emetropia and 100% of eyes had spherical equivalent refractions that were within ±1.0 D of the target refraction. Visual acuities and defocus curves clearly confirmed trifocal optical performance (UDVA=0.03 ±0.05; UIVA=0.21 ±0.04; UNVA=0.12 ±0.04 logMAR; expressed as mean ±SD). Depth of focus showed identical results (DOF=0.486 D) compared to a trifocal capsular bag IOL, while the defocus curve was found to be superior in the intermediate and near ranges when compared to a trifocal capsular bag IOL. All patients achieved spectacle independence at all distances. All add-on IOLs were well positioned in the ciliary sulcus. No negative changes were noted in connection with endothelial cell counts, IOPs, the angle structure during surgery and during the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: The supplementary trifocal add-on IOL seems to be a safe, efficient and stable solution for achieving spectacle independence in pseudophakic patients with monofocal primary IOLs.

Subjective and objective depth of field measures in pseudophakic eyes: comparison between extended depth of focus, trifocal and bifocal intraocular lenses.

PURPOSE: To evaluate different intraocular lens (IOL) designs and to determine whether extended depth of focus (EDOF) lenses provide a higher depth of field (DOF) than the rest considering both subjective and objective measurements. METHODS: A total of 100 eyes undergoing cataract surgery were divided into six groups depending on the IOL implanted: bifocal designs were Tecnis ZMB and ZLB (Abbott Laboratories, Illinois, USA), trifocal designs were Finevision (PhysIOL, Liège, Belgium) and AT LISA Tri (Carl Zeiss Meditec., Jena, Germany) and EDOF designs were Symfony (Abbott Laboratories, Illinois, USA) and MiniWell (SIFI MedTech, Catania, Italy). Subjective DOF was obtained from defocus curves for the range of vergences which provide a VA over 0.1 LogMAR and 0.2 LogMAR. Aberrometry was measured and Visual Strehl Optical Transference Function (90%) was used to quantify objectively the DOF. RESULTS: Symfony IOL group showed better subjective and objective DOF compared to the rest of IOL groups, with statistically significant differences (p < 0.001). Comparison between subjective and objective DOF showed that subjective measures were higher for all IOLs, being these differences statistically significant for all groups when compared with objective measures (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Objective and subjective measures of DOF are not comparable due to differences in methodologies and criterions to define the level of degradation acceptance. Nevertheless, both objective and subjective measures demonstrate a greater DOF for EDOF designs compared to bifocal and trifocal IOLs, being the Symfony IOL the one providing higher levels of subjective and objective DOF.

Refractive predictability and visual outcomes of an extended range of vision intraocular lens in eyes with previous myopic laser in situ keratomileusis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the refractive predictability obtained with an extended range of vision intraocular lens in eyes with previous myopic laser in situ keratomileusis, confirming which intraocular lens power formula provides the most accurate calculation. METHODS: The study enrolled 71 eyes with previous successful myopic laser in situ keratomileusis surgery of 43 patients undergoing cataract surgery with implantation of the extended range of vision intraocular lens TECNIS Symfony (Johnson and Johnson Vision). Intraocular lens power was calculated using all American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons formulas, and their average value was selected for implantation. Refractive outcomes were evaluated at 3 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Postoperative spherical equivalent within ±0.50 and ±1.00 D was found in 61.6% and 86.3% of eyes, respectively. In eyes with pre-laser in situ keratomileusis data available, no significant correlation was found between pre-laser in situ keratomileusis spherical equivalent and post-cataract surgery spherical equivalent (r = 0.237, p = 0.114). A postoperative spherical equivalent within ±0.50 D was found in 65.2% and 55.6% of eyes in the subgroups with and without pre-laser in situ keratomileusis data available, respectively (p = 0.480). Statistically significantly higher differences between the intraocular lens power implanted and the calculation provided by the Potvin-Hill (p = 0.028) and Barrett True K No History formulas (p = 0.022) were found in those eyes with postoperative spherical equivalent > 0.50 D. CONCLUSION: The extended range of vision intraocular lens evaluated can provide a predictable refractive correction in eyes with previous laser in situ keratomileusis surgery. The Potvin-Hill and Barrett True K No History are the most adequate formulas to perform intraocular lens power calculations in these cases.

Evolution of visual performance in 250 eyes implanted with the Tecnis ZM900 multifocal IOL.

PURPOSE: To evaluate visual performance in relation to time after implantation of the multifocal Tecnis intraocular lens (IOL) in patients with cataract. METHODS: This prospective case series involved 250 eyes of 137 patients with cataract aged 68.5+/-9.9 years. Monocular uncorrected and corrected near visual acuity (NVA and DCNVA) and distance visual acuity (UCVA and BCVA), occurrence of visual symptoms, and patient satisfaction were evaluated at 1-3 days, 30-90 days, and 150-210 days after surgery. Posterior capsule opacification and contrast sensitivity under photopic conditions were also assessed. RESULTS: At the last follow-up visit, mean NVA and DCNVA was 0.215+/-0.082 and 0.189+/-0.045 logMAR, respectively. The majority of eyes (96.8%) could read J2 without correction, including 83.2% reading J1. With best distance correction, 95.6% of eyes were able to read J1. Mean UCVA and BCVA was 0.144+/-0.101 and 0.09+/-0.03 logMAR, including 77.6% and 98.4% of eyes that achieved 20/30 or better, respectively. The majority of patients (>90%) ranked their near, distance, and global vision as good or excellent and 88.4% were free from spectacles. A significant improvement of uncorrected and corrected distance and near VA as well as a decrease in the intensity of subjective photic phenomena was observed over time. At the last follow-up visit, the rate of posterior capsule opacification (grade 1) was 4.4% and mean monocular contrast sensitivity was 1.44+/-0.26. CONCLUSIONS: The multifocal Tecnis IOL provides excellent near vision and good distance vision in patients with cataract. However, most patients required a neuroadaptation period of approximately 6 months to experience full visual benefits of the lens.

Evaluation of image quality after implantation of 2 diffractive multifocal intraocular lens models.

PURPOSE: To compare the visual quality after implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). SETTING: Departments of Ophthalmology, Hospital Quirón and Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain. METHODS: In a prospective nonrandomized consecutive trial, patients had bilateral implantation of Acri.LISA 366D (Group A) or Tecnis ZM900 (Group B) multifocal IOLs. One eye of each patient was included in the study. Three months postoperatively, uncorrected and corrected distance and near visual acuities, pupil diameter, and refraction were assessed. The modulation transfer function (MTF), point-spread function (PSF), and light scattering were calculated using the double-pass Optical Quality Analysis System for distance vision with a 4.0 mm pupil diameter. RESULTS: Each IOL group comprised 20 patients. No statistically significant differences were found between the 2 groups in postoperative mean spherical equivalent or mean monocular corrected distance or near visual acuity. The PSF variables were slightly lower in Group B, although the difference between groups was not statistically significant. The MTF parameters (double-pass value at 100%, 20%, and 9% contrast) were slightly higher in Group A (P = .07, P = .04, and P = .09, respectively). The mean objective scatter index was 1.83 +/- 0.91 (SD) in Group A and 2.00 +/- 0.74 in Group B (P = .43). CONCLUSIONS: Both diffractive multifocal IOLs improved functional visual capacity at distance and near. Although the visual quality variables were slightly better in Group A than in Group B, the differences were not statistically significant.