Comparison of visual outcomes after implantation of AtLisa tri 839 MP and Symfony intraocular lenses.

PURPOSE: To compare visual outcomes after implantation of AtLisa tri 839 MP and Symfony intraocular lenses (IOLs). METHODS: All subjects underwent sequential bilateral cataract extraction with AtLisa tri 839 MP or Symfony IOL implantation. The design is prospective case series. Each group consists of 20 patients (40 eyes). At 1 year postoperatively, the following parameters were analysed: binocular uncorrected visual acuity (log MAR): for distance (UDVA) at 4 m, for intermediate distances (UIVA) at 60, 70, 80 cm and for near (UNVA) at 40 cm, defocus curve, mesopic and photopic contrast sensitivities (CSs), spectacle independence, visual function test questionnaire modified VFQ-25), photopic phenomena and postoperative complications. RESULTS: In the AtLisa tri 839 MP group, the mean binocular UNVA and UIVA were significantly better than in the Symfony group (UNVA: - 0.01 ± 0.04 vs. 0.21 ± 0.15; p = 0.000; 60 cm UIVA: - 0.01 ± 0.04 vs. 0.09 ± 0.09, p = 0.001; 70 cm UIVA - 0.05 ± 0.06 vs. 0.11 ± 0.08, p = 0.002; 80 cm UIVA - 0.01 ± 0.06 vs. 0.15 ± 0.08, p = 0.019). There were no significant between-group differences in the mean binocular UDVA and CS, with one exception: the mean binocular distance CS (18 cpd) under mesopic conditions was significantly better in the Symfony group than in the AtLisa tri 839 MP group (1.39 ± 0.22 vs. 1.17 ± 0.27; p = 0.015). The defocus curve analysis revealed significant between-group differences at vergences of 2.0 to - 4.0 D (p < 0.05), except for 2.0, 1.0, 0 and - 1.5. All subjects in AtLisa tri 839 MP group and 18 subjects (90%) in Symfony group were spectacle independent. Patients from both groups highly rated their overall vision quality in the VFQ-25 (1.67 ± 0.47 vs. 1.85 ± 0.5 in the Symfony and AtLisa tri 839 MP group, respectively, p = NS). The scores for daytime driving (1.00 ± 0.00 vs. 1.21 ± 0.36; p = 0.002), night driving (1.57 ± 0.55 vs. 2.13 ± 1.15; p = 0.027) and difficult situation driving (1.14 ± 0.31 vs. 1.53 ± 0.56; p = 0.049) were significantly better in the AtLisa tri 839 MP group than in the Symfony group. The incidence and perception level of halo and glare were significantly reduced (p = 0.00) in the Symfony group as compared to the AtLisa tri 839 MP group. The postoperative course was uneventful in all subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Visual outcomes achieved with both IOLs are comparable. In both groups, 90% of patients achieved spectacle independence. Whereas the AtLisa tri 839 MP IOL implantation was associated with slightly better intermediate distance VA and significantly better near VA, photic phenomena were less perceived by patients with Symfony IOLs.

Clinical Outcomes After Bilateral Implantation of a Diffractive Trifocal Intraocular Lens: A Worldwide Pooled Analysis of Prospective Clinical Investigations.

Purpose: To investigate visual and safety outcomes of AcrySof® IQ PanOptix® (model TFNT00), a trifocal, presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL), in patients of different ethnicities across multiple countries, based on a pooled analysis of six prospective multicenter studies. Patients and Methods: This pooled analysis included adult patients from six prospective clinical studies performed across 56 centers worldwide. After cataract removal by phacoemulsification, all patients were implanted with TFNT00; follow-up duration varied from 3 to 12 months according to the studies' design. Binocular defocus curve; absolute manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE); and binocular photopic uncorrected and corrected visual acuities at distance (UCDVA, BCDVA; 4-5 m), intermediate (UCIVA, DCIVA; 60-66 cm), and near (UCNVA, DCNVA; 40 cm) were measured. Results: The study included 557 patients, 547 of whom were implanted bilaterally with the TFNT00 IOL (n = 1094 eyes). Binocular visual data at 1 month and 3-6 months after implantation were available for up to 546 and 542 bilaterally implanted patients, respectively. A continuous range of 0.1 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) or better vision from distance (0.00 diopter [D], 4-5 m) to near (-3.00 D; optically equivalent to 33 cm) was observed 3-6 months after TFNT00 implantation. At 3-6 months, 88.2% of first eyes achieved an MRSE ≤0.50 D and 88.7% of second eyes achieved an MRSE ≤0.50 D. Overall, 99.3%, 92.3%, and 94.6% of patients bilaterally implanted with TFNT00 achieved binocular photopic BCDVA, DCIVA, and DCNVA of 0.14 logMAR or better, respectively. Ocular adverse device effects and secondary surgical interventions (SSIs) were infrequent. Conclusion: This global pooled analysis showed that TFNT00 provided a continuous range of 0.1 logMAR (~20/25 Snellen) or better vision from distance to 33 cm, with a low incidence of ocular adverse device effects and SSIs.

Patient Satisfaction and Visual Function Following Implantation of Trifocal or Extended Range of Vision Intraocular Lenses.

Purpose: To compare the trifocal TFNT00 and extended depth-of-focus (EDF) ZXR00 intraocular lenses (IOLs) with respect to overall satisfaction with near and distance vision, visual acuity, dysphotopsia symptoms, spectacle dependence, and mesopic best corrected contrast sensitivity (MBCCS). Materials and Methods: This non-randomized, retrospective, single-centre, comparative study took place at the Kensington Eye Institute in Toronto, Canada. Subjects implanted with either the TFNT00 IOL (n = 11) or ZXR00 IOL (n = 13) were assessed up to 4 years post operatively. Overall satisfaction with distance and near vision, corrected distance visual acuity, uncorrected visual acuity at distance, intermediate (60 cm) and near (40 cm) (UNVA), dysphotopsia symptoms, spectacle dependence and monocular MBCCS were evaluated. Results: Forty-eight eyes of 24 subjects (mean age 68 years, 54% female) were assessed. There was no difference in overall satisfaction; both groups had a median score of 10/10 for overall distance vision, and 7/10 and 8/10 for near vision for EDF and trifocal, respectively. MBCCS at the higher spatial frequencies was significantly better with the ZXR00 IOL. Potentially clinically relevant but not statistically significant differences were found; the trifocal group (vs the EDF group) had better binocular UNVA (20/24 vs 20/32) and less spectacle dependence at least some of the time (54% vs 85%). Conclusion: The ZXR00 may be preferred for those who want optimal contrast sensitivity in dim lighting. Consistent with previous studies, the TFNT00 trifocal IOL may be a better choice for those who want to optimize UNVA. More studies in North America are required to further investigate spectacle dependence.

Premium Monovision versus Bilateral Myopic Monovision, Hybrid Monovision and Bilateral Trifocal Implantation: A Comparative Study.

Purpose: Contemporary monovision techniques use premium intraocular lenses (IOLs), either in both eyes or at least in the non-dominant one. Primary objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of premium monovision (implantation of the trifocal diffractive Panoptix IOL in the non-dominant eye and the bifocal hybrid refractive-diffractive Restor IOL in the dominant eye), against bilateral myopic monovision (implantation of the monofocal SN60WF IOL targeting -0.50 D in the dominant eye and -1.25 D myopia in the non-dominant one), hybrid monovision (implantation of Panoptix in the non-dominant eye and SN60WF in the dominant eye) and bilateral trifocal implantation (with bilateral Panoptix implantation). Methods: This is a prospective, comparative, clinic-based trial. Cataract patients populated four study groups: Monovision Group (MoG), Multifocal Lens Group (MfG), Hybrid Monovision Group (HmG) and Premium Monovision Group (PmG). Binocular Uncorrected Distance Visual Acuity (UDVA), Uncorrected Reading Acuity and Critical Print Size at 60cm (UIRA, UICPS) and at 40cm (UNRA, UNCPS), contrast sensitivity, vision-related functional impairment, dysphotopsia symptoms and spectacle dependence were evaluated 6 months following the operation of the second eye. A mathematical model was constructed, which calculated the relative efficacy of each surgical intervention. Results: A total of 120 participants were recruited and populated equally the study groups. Significant improvement of preoperative UDVA was observed in all study groups. No significant differences could be detected in postoperative UDVA and UIRA (p = 0.24) among study groups, while significant differences were noticed in UICPS (p = 0.04), UNRA (p = 0.02) and UNCPS (p = 0.01). Dysphotopic phenomena (glare and shadows) were significantly more in the MfG arm followed by the PmG group (p = 0.04 and p = 0.02, respectively), while perceived difficulty and spectacle independence rates were significantly better in PmG group. PmG presented the best overall relative efficacy. Conclusion: All surgical techniques present satisfactory outcomes. Premium monovision seems to demonstrate the best outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04618380. Registered 05 November 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04618380.

Comparison of the Visual Outcomes of an Extended Depth-of-Focus Lens and a Trifocal Lens.

PURPOSE: To compare the visual performance of the AcrySof IQ PanOptix trifocal intraocular lens and the TECNIS Symfony extended depth-of-focus lens at near and distance visual ranges. METHODS: A total of 146 patients (221 eyes) who underwent phacoemulsification and cataract extraction and received either a PanOptix or Symfony lens from January 2019 to July 2020 were included in the study (83 PanOptix non-toric, 30 PanOptix toric, 70 Symfony non-toric, and 38 Symfony toric). Uncorrected distance (UDVA), uncorrected near (UNVA), and corrected distance (CDVA) visual acuity were assessed at one-day, one-month, and three-months postoperatively. Averages of UDVA, UNVA, and CDVA were taken to evaluate which lens was superior at near and distance visual ranges. Secondary outcome measures including glare, halo, dryness, and problems with night vision were documented at each postoperative visit. RESULTS: At one month postoperatively, the average UNVA was 0.16 ± 0.14 logMAR in the PanOptix group and 0.21 ± 0.14 logMAR in the Symfony group (P=0.007); the average UDVA for the PanOptix group was 0.09 ± 0.13 logMAR compared to the Symfony group at 0.10 ± 0.14 logMAR (P=0.67); and the average CDVA was 0.02 ± 0.05 logMAR in the PanOptix group and 0.00 ± 0.04 logMAR in the Symfony group (P=0.11). At three months postoperatively, there were no statistically significant differences in UNVA, UDVA, or CDVA between the two groups (P=0.18, 0.79, 0.68 respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in secondary outcome measures at one- and three-months (P=0.49, 0.10 respectively). CONCLUSION: The AcrySof IQ PanOptix trifocal intraocular lens appears to afford better UNVA compared to the TECNIS Symfony extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens at one-month postoperatively, though this difference was not seen at three months postoperatively. There is no statistically significant difference in UDVA and CDVA between the two groups at postoperative day one, one-month, and three-months.

Bilateral early capsular block syndrome following implantation of the new trifocal toric lens.

A young patient underwent phacoemulsification with endocapsular implantation of trifocal toric lens in both eyes (AT LISA tri toric 939 MP, Carl-Zeiss, Germany). One-week postsurgery, he developed capsular block syndrome (CBS) in both eyes. There was deterioration of uncorrected visual acuity at 1-week postsurgery, with a myopic shift of 2.5 diopters (D) in the right eye and 2.0 D in the left eye. The intraocular pressure was only elevated in the left eye. Neodymium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser posterior capsulotomy resolved the block successfully in both eyes. A thick lens with a plate haptic design may have contributed to the early CBS.