Clinical reviews

Purpose: To assess visual acuity, binocular defocus curve, spectacle independence, and photic phenomena after bilateral same-day cataract surgery with implantation of an extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens (IOL) with mini-monovision.

Methods: Single-center retrospective study including 124 eyes from 62 patients who underwent bilateral implantation of an isofocal EDOF lens [Isopure® (BVI)] with mini-monovision (-0.50 D). Refraction, visual acuity at different distances, binocular defocus curves, spectacle independence, and subjective ratings of picture-referenced photic phenomena were assessed one to two months postoperatively.

Results: The mean postoperative refractive spherical equivalent was -0.15±0.41D in the dominant eyes and -0.46±0.35D in the mini-monovision eyes (p<0.01). Overall, 98.4% and 87.7% of the eyes were within ±1.00D and ±0.50D of the target refraction, respectively. Postoperative monocular corrected distance visual acuity was -0.04±0.07 logMAR. Binocular uncorrected visual acuity was -0.02±0.07, 0.13±0.11and 0.40±0.20 logMAR for far, intermediate and near, respectively. At the visual acuity threshold of 0.20 logMAR (or better) the defocus curve ranged from -1.6D to +0.9D. Reported spectacle-independence was 96% for far distance, 95% for intermediate, and 34% for near. Five percent of patients reported halos, 16% starburst, and 16% glare. Only 7% of all patients considered them bothersome.

Conclusion: In patients undergoing same-day bilateral cataract surgery, an isofocal EDOF lens provided an extended range of functional vision, up to 63 cm, resulting in useful uncorrected near vision, good uncorrected intermediate vision, and excellent uncorrected distance vision. Subjective patient satisfaction in terms of spectacle independence and photic phenomena was high.

Close abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients with diffractive aspheric trifocal intraocular lens FineVision Pod F IOL (PhysIOL, Liège, Belgium) implantation.

Methods: Thirty eight eyes received phacoemulsification and implantation of FineVision Pod F IOL. Uncorrected distant visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), refractive values, and defocus curve were evaluated at postoperative 1 month and 3 months. Optical quality was evaluated with the contrast sensitivity test, OQAS® (Optical Quality Analysis System, Visiometrics, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain) and questionnaire.

Results: At the 3-month postoperative follow-up, the mean spherical equivalent was 0.01 ± 0.31 D and the mean UDVA, UIVA and UNVA were 0.04 ± 0.07, 0.19 ± 0.12, and 0.04 ± 0.07, respectively. Mean contrast sensitivities at 0.75, 1.5, 3, 6, 12, and 18 cycles per degrees were 2.00 ± 1.54, 2.16 ± 1.60, 2.25 ± 1.76, 2.16 ± 1.83, 1.52 ± 1.47 and 1.03 ± 0.95 respectively and mean objective scatter index by OQAS® (Optical Quality Analysis System, Visiometrics) was 1.54 ± 0.74. In satisfaction analysis, general satisfaction with surgery was 89% and spectacle independence were 89% at far, 78% at intermediate and 83% at near distance. Postoperative dissatisfaction factors were dryness (36%), glare at night (32%), halo (18%).

Conclusions: The FineVision Pod F IOL showed excellent distant and near visual acuities with an effective intermediate visual acuity. The eyes with FineVision Pod F IOL expected to achieve the favorable visual outcome and patient satisfaction.

Close abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical results and safety obtained with a new type of multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) using a trifocal design to achieve pseudoaccommodation.

Methods: A pilot observational study of patients with a trifocal IOL (FineVision; PhysIOL, Liege, Belgium) implanted by 1 of 12 surgeons between March and December 2010. Visual outcomes that were assessed postoperatively included uncorrected and corrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity.

Results: One hundred ninety-eight eyes of 99 patients were analyzed. Patients were observed for an average of 6.44 ± 4.67 months (range: 0.2 to 17 months). Preoperative corrected distance visual acuity was 0.22 ± 0.26 logMAR. At the final follow-up visit, corrected distance visual acuity was 0.01 ± 0.10 logMAR, uncorrected distance visual acuity was 0.01 ± 0.06 logMAR, uncorrected intermediate visual acuity was 0.08 ± 0.10 logMAR, and mean uncorrected near visual acuity was 0.00 ± 0.04 logMAR. Postoperative binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity was 0.01 ± 0.07 logMAR, uncorrected intermediate visual acuity was 0.06 ± 0.08 logMAR, and uncorrected near visual acuity was −0.03 ± 0.04 logMAR. Postopeative mean residual sphere was 0.21 ± 0.48 diopters (D), with a residual cylinder of −0.24 ± 0.31 D. Postoperative spherical equivalent was 0.11 ± 0.36 D.

Conclusions: The results demonstrated that the trifocal FineVision IOL is able to restore near, intermediate, and distance visual function.

Close abstract

Methods: Twenty-three patients had bilateral cataract surgery with the implantation of a trifocal IOL with double C-loop haptics. Postoperative examinations at 6 months included assessing uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) at 5 m, uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA) at 80 cm, uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) and distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) at 40 cm. Binocular defocus, contrast sensitivity, spectacle independence, symptoms of photic phenomena and quality of vision (QOV) were also observed.

Results: Twenty-three patients received 46 IOLs binocularly. Manifest refraction spherical equivalent was − 0.227 ± 0.385 D (mean ± standard deviation) at 6 months postoperatively. Binocular UDVA, binocular UIVA and binocular UNVA were − 0.101 ± 0.065, − 0.021 ± 0.079 and 0.022 ± 0.095 logMAR units, respectively. Binocular CDVA, binocular DCIVA and binocular DCNVA were − 0.151 ± 0.044, − 0.042 ± 0.067 and − 0.011 ± 0.080 logMAR, respectively. Binocular CDVA of 0.00 logMAR or better was obtained in the defocus from − 3.0 D until + 0.5 D. Only 8.7% of patients required the use of spectacles postoperatively. There were no symptoms of glare, halo and light disturbance in 78.3%, 56.5% and 69.6% of patients, respectively. QOV scores significantly improved postoperatively (P < 0.0001).

Conclusion: The hydrophobic acrylic trifocal IOL with double C-loop haptics provides good visual performance at all distances and produces high spectacle independence rate and patient satisfaction.

Close abstract

Purpose: To determine whether combined cataract surgery with endoscopic laser cycloablation produces less inflammation than cataract surgery combined with a filtering procedure.

Setting: Taylor Regional Hospital (surgeries) and EyeSight Associates (examinations), Warner Robins, Georgia, USA.

Methods: A randomized prospective study was conducted of 58 eyes of 58 patients comparing endoscopic laser cycloablation performed through a cataract incision at the time of cataract surgery with combined trabeculectomy and cataract surgery.

Results: Mean follow-up was 2 years. At the final available visit, 30% of endoscopic laser patients achieved intraocular pressure control (below 19 mm Hg) without medication and 65% with medication. Forty percent of trabeculectomy patients achieved control without medication and 52% with medication. Four endoscopic laser patients (14%) and 3 trabeculectomy patients (10%) were considered treatment failures (required additional surgical intervention).

Conclusion: Endoscopic laser cycloablation performed through a cataract incision was a reasonably safe and effective alternative to combined cataract and trabeculectomy surgery, providing an option for cataract patients who have glaucoma requiring surgical intervention.

Close abstract

Background: To examine the outcome and complications of combined phacoemulsification and endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation as surgical management of cataract and glaucoma.

Design: Retrospective uncontrolled case series from the glaucoma unit, Western Eye Hospital, London, UK.

Participants: Sixty-three eyes from 59 patients with coexisting cataract and glaucoma.

Methods: Patients underwent routine phacoemulsification followed by 270-360 degree endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation as a single procedure.

Main outcome measures: Intraocular pressure, number of intraocular pressure-lowering medications, logMAR visual acuity, recorded complications.

Results: Baseline characteristics included mean age (77.3 ± 11.1 years), mean logMAR visual acuity (1.01 ± 0.98), mean intraocular pressure (21.13 ± 6.21 mmHg) and mean number of intraocular pressure-lowering medications, (2.71 ± 1.06). Twelve months after phacoemulsification and endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation, mean intraocular pressure had reduced to 16.09 ± 5.27 mmHg (P < 0.01), number of intraocular pressure-lowering medications reduced to 1.47 ± 1.30 (P < 0.01) and mean logMAR acuity improved to 0.33 ± 0.22 (P < 0.01). Success, defined as an intraocular pressure reduction > 20% with intraocular pressure 6-21 mmHg, was achieved in 55.5% of eyes at 12 months. Complications included fibrinous uveitis, elevated intraocular pressure, posterior vitreous detachment and induced astigmatism.

Conclusion: Phacoemulsification and endoscopic cyclophotocoagulation is both safe and effective as surgical management for cataract and glaucoma. Larger intraocular pressure reductions can be achieved in older patients and those with higher baseline intraocular pressure.

Close abstract

Purpose: To investigate the visual outcomes between mix-and-match bifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) (ReSTOR +2.50 and +3.00 diopters [D]; Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Fort Worth, TX) versus bilateral implantation of a trifocal IOL (FineVision; PhysIOL, Liège, Belgium).

Methods: Twenty-three patients (average age: 56.3 ± 6.9 years; range: 45 to 71 years) referred for lens phacoemulsification and IOL implantation were included in this study. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups. The FineVision group was bilaterally implanted with the FineVision trifocal IOL and the ReSTOR group was implanted with mix-and-match bifocal ReSTOR +2.50 and +3.00 D IOLs. A 3-month postoperative check was performed, and manifest refraction and logMAR uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance and near visual acuities were recorded. Monocular and binocular defocus curve testing was performed under photopic (85 cd/m²) conditions in 0.50-D defocus steps. Contrast sensitivity was measured monocularly and binocularly under mesopic conditions at spatial frequencies of 3, 6, 12, and 18 cycles per degree using the CSV-1000 contrast test (VectorVision, Greenville, OH).

Results: There were no reported differences in monocular distance visual acuity or refractive outcomes between groups (P > .05). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in contrast sensitivity between the three IOLs (P > .05). The FineVision group achieved better monocular and binocular near and intermediate visual acuities under defocus curve testing than the ReSTOR group (P < .05).

Conclusions: Binocular implantation of the FineVision trifocal IOL provided a better range of visual acuities at near and intermediate distances than mix-and-match bifocal IOL implantation.

Close abstract

Abstract: We compared the degree of postoperative iris distortion with the diamond-shaped Malyugin ring and the circular Visitec I-Ring iris dilators using postoperative iris photographs in a patient with bilateral small nondilating pupils. Routine phacoemulsification was performed in the right eye with the assistance of a Malyugin ring for iris dilation. One month later, the same procedure was performed in the left eye using the circular ring for iris dilation. Anterior chamber slitlamp photographs were taken of both eyes. The amount of distortion in the postoperative pupils was calculated using the ratio of the postoperative pupil area to the area of the circle of best fit. The circular ring, constructed from a softer material, resulted in 11% distortion and the Malyugin ring, 49%, suggesting that the circular ring caused less trauma to the iris.

Close abstract

Purpose: To evaluate visual outcomes and satisfaction after implantation of 2 trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs): a spherical IOL and a toric IOL.

Setting: IOA Madrid Innova Ocular, Madrid, Spain.

Design: Prospective, controlled clinical trial.

Methods: Patients (>50 years) were implanted bilaterally with either a trifocal spherical hydrophilic IOL (FineVision POD F) if corneal astigmatism was 1.0 diopter (D) or less, or with a trifocal toric hydrophilic IOL (FineVision POD FT) if astigmatism was more than 1.0 D. Outcomes analyzed 3 months after surgery included monocular and binocular visual acuities at distance, near, and intermediate, both uncorrected and corrected. Defocus curves, contrast sensitivity, and patient satisfaction were also assessed.

Results: There was no statistically significant difference between groups in monocular uncorrected distance (UDVA) (P = .38), monocular corrected distance (CDVA) (P = .22), or distance-corrected intermediate (DCIVA) (P = .95) visual acuities; however, the distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) was slightly better in the spherical IOL group (P = .008). The UDVA was 20/25 or better in 89% of eyes in the spherical IOL group and 93% in the toric IOL group. The DCIVA was 20/32 or better in 92% of eyes in the spherical IOL group and 93% in the toric IOL group at 80 cm (Radner Vissum chart), and 20/32 or better in 100% of eyes in both groups at 63 cm (Colenbrander chart). The DCNVA (Radner chart) was 20/32 or better in 89% of eyes in the spherical IOL group and 90% of eyes in the toric IOL group. There was no difference between the groups in contrast sensitivity, defocus curves, cylinder, or satisfaction results.

Conclusion: Patients had significant improvement in visual acuity and gained functional uncorrected visual acuity across all distances in both groups. Satisfaction was high with both IOLs.

Close abstract

Purpose: To compare visual outcomes in patients with cataract surgery and bilateral implantation of a trifocal or bifocal intraocular lens (IOL).

Setting: University Eye Clinic Maastricht, the Netherlands.

Design: Prospective randomized clinical trial.

Methods: Eyes with cataract and less than 1.0 diopter (D) of corneal astigmatism were randomized to receive bilateral implantation of Finevision Micro F trifocal IOLs or Acrysof IQ Restor +3.0 bifocal IOLs. Outcome measures were monocular and binocular uncorrected distance (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate (UIVA), and uncorrected near (UNVA) visual acuities; refractive outcomes; binocular defocus curve; contrast sensitivity; reading speed; patient satisfaction; and spectacle independence.

Results: Six months postoperatively, the mean binocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA in 56 eyes of 28 patients were 0.01 logMAR ± 0.11 (SD), 0.32 ± 0.15 logMAR, and 0.15 ± 0.13 logMAR in the trifocal group (n = 15) and 0.00 ± 0.09 logMAR, 0.28 ± 0.08 logMAR, and 0.12 ± 0.08 logMAR in the bifocal group (n = 13), respectively. The trifocal group showed a more continuous defocus curve and better results at −1.0 D of defocus (P < .01). The mean mesopic contrast sensitivity was higher in the bifocal group (P = .02). Complete spectacle independence was reported by 80% of trifocal patients and 50% of bifocal patients. There were no significant differences in refractive outcomes, reading speed, or patient satisfaction.

Close abstract

Background: Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC), a popular gonioscopic solution, can cause discomfort and blurred vision. These side effects have been attributed to the preservative benzalkonium chloride (BAK). Carboxymethylcellulose (CMC), an unpreserved, viscous solution, might well provide adequate patient comfort and cushioning during gonioscopy without producing blur or irritation.

Methods: The effects of CMC and HPMC during gonioscopy were evaluated in 55 human subjects. Corneal staining, comfort, subjective vision, and measured visual acuity (VA) were assessed.

Results: In comparison with HPMC, CMC effected less corneal staining, greater comfort, and better vision after the procedure,

Conclusion: CMC proved to be a viable and superior alternative to HPMC as a gonioscopic solution.

Close abstract

Purpose: To compare the clinical outcomes obtained after implantation of 1 of 3 models of diffractive trifocal IOLs.

Setting: Hospital da Luz, Lisbon, Portugal.

Design: Prospective randomized comparative study.

Methods: Patients undergoing cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of 1 of 3 models of diffractive trifocal IOLs were enrolled. The IOL models implanted were the FineVision POD F, RayOne Trifocal, or the AcrySof IQ PanOptix IOL (30 eyes of 15 patients in each group). Visual acuity (VA), refraction, defocus curve, and contrast sensitivity outcomes were evaluated during a 3-month follow-up. Furthermore, the Quality of Vision questionnaire (QoV) was used to evaluate the frequency, severity, and discomfort of different visual symptoms.

Results: A total of 90 eyes of 45 patients were included. No statistically significant differences were found between groups in distance, intermediate, and near VA (P ≥ .112) and postoperative refraction (P ≥ .059). Postoperative binocular uncorrected intermediate VA of 0.10 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) or better was found in 14 (93.33%) patients in the 3 groups. Postoperative binocular uncorrected near VA of 0.10 logMAR or better was found in 13 (86.67%), 14 (93.33%), and 13 (86.67%) patients in the POD F, RayOne, and PanOptix IOLs groups, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found between groups in scotopic contrast sensitivity with and without glare and in the QoV scores (P ≥ .057), except for the difference between the POD F and RayOne IOLs groups in depth perception severity, which was less in the RayOne IOL group (P = .019).

Conclusions: The 3 trifocal IOLs evaluated provided a complete visual restoration with good visual quality outcomes.

Close abstract

Purpose: To compare the corneal wetting properties of balanced salt solution (BSS) and a viscous eye lubricant during cataract surgery.

Setting: Vienna Institute for Research in Ocular Surgery, Department of Ophthalmology, Hanusch Hospital, Vienna, Austria.

Design: Prospective randomized controlled study.

Methods: This randomized controlled subject- and examiner-masked study comprised patients scheduled for cataract surgery. The patients were randomly assigned to receive either BSS or hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC) 2% gel (Cornea_Protect). Fluorescein staining, optical clarity during surgery, application frequency, subjective grading of discomfort, and subjective dryness of the eye were assessed.

Results: One hundred one eyes of 97 patients (mean age 73.6 years; range 53 to 87 years) were included in the study. Mean grade of fluorescein staining was 9.46 ± 3.64 (SD) and 9.76 ± 3.27 (SD) in the BSS group and the HPMC 2% group, respectively (P=.67). Median grade of optical clarity during surgery was 2.0 in the BSS group and 1.0 in the HPMC 2% group, a statistically significant difference (P=.03). Median application frequency of BSS was 10 times higher than median application frequency of 1 time for HPMC 2%, a statistically significant difference (P<.001).

Conclusions: Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose 2% provided significantly better optical clarity than BSS during cataract surgery. Because frequent irrigation is not needed and HPMC 2% provides a better view for the surgeon, the use of HPMC 2% results in increased comfort for the patient, especially under topical anaesthesia, and in a simpler and possibly safer surgical procedure.

Close abstract

Objective: To compare the rotational stability and cylinder reduction of different toric intraocular lenses (IOLs).

Method: This was a prospective, cross-sectional study of 68 eyes that had at least 0.75 diopters (D) of corneal astigmatism prior to cataract surgery and were at least 3 months post-toric IOL implantation (Envista, AcrySof, FineVision). Patients recruited underwent visual acuity testing, manifest refraction, pupil dilation, and toric IOL axis determination. Actual axis position was obtained and compared to the intended axis calculated from the toric IOL calculator. Any difference between the two was considered an axis deviation. Main outcome measures were postoperative deviation of the IOL axis from the intended axis, uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), best corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA), manifest refraction, and cylinder reduction.

Results: There was no significant difference in the rotational stability of the three different types of toric IOLs  (p=0.95). Mean axis deviation for AcrySof, Envista, and FineVision were 2.43, 2.66, and 2.75 degrees, respectively. There was a significant decrease in the cylinder from preoperative to postoperative levels for all groups (p=0.00 for Envista, p=0.03 for AcrySof, and p=0.00 for FineVision). There were significant improvements in the mean UCVA and BCDVA after cataract surgery and implantation of toric IOLs for all three groups.

Conclusion: The three IOL platforms (AcrySof, Envista, and FineVision) showed good rotational stability and significant cylinder reduction.Visual and refractive outcomes improved after surgery

Close abstract

Introduction: The management of presbyopic patients is a medical, surgical and economic issue. We wondered which procedure, whether a Presbylasik technique called Regular Supracor or the intraocular surgery of clear lens replacement by a trifocal diffractive lens (presbyopic lens exchange [Prelex]), provided the best results (in visual acuity and satisfaction) for our hyperopic and presbyopic patients between 55 and 70. The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of the two techniques (at one week and three months) and to assess patients' quality of life.

Methods: This study is a retrospective monocentric clinical trial conducted between June 2011 and March 2014, on 21 hyperopic presbyopic patients (mean age 60.9 years), in the "hôpital d'instruction des armées-Percy" (Clamart); 13 patients underwent the corneal treatment of Presbylasik (with the Intralase FS60 femtosecond laser [AMO, USA] and the Technolas 217P excimer laser [Technolas Perfect Vision, GmbH] following the Zyoptix Tissue-Saving algorithm adjusted with a nomogram and the Regular Supracor mode), and 8 patients underwent clear lens extraction (Prelex), through bimanual phacoemulsification and implantation of diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses (Finevision Micro F, PhysIOL(*)).

Results: Mean uncorrected binocular distance and near vision visual acuity in the Supracor group were respectively 0.03 (-0.2-0.1) LogMar and 0.23 (0.06-0.36) one week postoperatively and 0.031 (-0.2-0.1) and 0,166 (0.06-0.36) three months postoperatively. In the Prelex group, the mean uncorrected one week binocular VA was 0.025 (0-0.1) for distance vision and 0.165 (0.06-0.18) for near distance and the three months visual acuity was 0 (-0.1-0.1) and 0.105 (0.06-0.18) for distance and near vision. All Prelex patients were spectacle-free at all distances, whereas 4 Supracor patients required spectacles for near vision postoperatively. Seven of 11 patients in the Supracor group and 100% of the Prelex patients were completely satisfied. Both groups experienced halos, but patients reported more halos in the Prelex group (75%). One eye required intraocular lens exchange and four eyes (16.7%) required a new corneal procedure in the Supracor group.

Conclusion: Both surgeries are safe and effective modalities in the management of hyperopic and presbyopic patients. However, the Prelex procedure seems to be more appropriate for patients over 55 years of age.

Close abstract

Purpose: To compare clinical outcomes between two trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs): the new FineVision POD F GF trifocal IOL made of hydrophobic acrylic glistening-free material, and the FineVision POD F IOL made of hydrophilic acrylic material with 26% water uptake in patients undergoing routine cataract surgery using standard phacoemulsification.

Setting: Semmelweis University, Department of Ophthalmology, Budapest, Hungary.

Design: Prospective controlled randomized single-center single-surgeon study.

Methods: Each patient had the hydrophilic POD F IOL implanted in one eye and the hydrophobic POD F GF IOL in the contralateral eye, according to a randomization table. Clinical outcomes included distance (4 m), intermediate (70 cm), and near (35 cm) visual acuities, contrast sensitivity measured under photopic and mesopic conditions, and defocus curves under photopic conditions. The follow-up was 6 months.

Results: The study comprised 25 patients. Under photopic conditions, there was no statistically significant difference between POD F GF and POD F IOLs for uncorrected distance (UDVA) (P = .607), uncorrected intermediate (UIVA) (P = .491), and uncorrected near (UNVA) (P = .414) visual acuities. Under mesopic conditions, there was no statistically significant differences between the 2 IOLs for UDVA (P = 1.00), UIVA (P = .149), and UNVA (P = .551). No statistically significant differences in contrast sensitivity were found between the groups under photopic (P = .4347) and mesopic (P = .425) conditions. No safety issues were reported.

Conclusion: The study demonstrated equally good visual and refractive outcomes for the POD F GF IOL and the POD F IOL, giving the surgeon the option to choose the preferred material for the individual patient without compromising clinical outcomes.

Close abstract

Purpose: To compare clinical outcomes after cataract surgery and bilateral implantation of 2 diffractive trifocal toric intraocular lenses (IOLs).

Setting: Hospital da Luz, Lisbon, Portugal.

Design: Double-arm, randomized, prospective case series.

Methods: A total of 60 patients were randomly allocated to receive bilateral implantation of either the FineVision Pod FT toric IOL (PhysIOL) or the AcrySof IQ PanOptix toric IOL (Alcon). Visual and refractive outcomes, contrast sensitivity, IOL misalignment, and quality of vision outcomes (QoV questionnaire) were evaluated at 3 months postoperatively. Surgically induced astigmatic changes were evaluated by vector analysis.

Results: Each group (FineVision toric and AcrySof IQ PanOptix toric) comprised 30 patients (60 eyes). No significant differences between groups were found regarding uncorrected and corrected distance and near visual outcomes (P ≥ .333). Mean postoperative distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity at 60 cm was 0.04 ± 0.09 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) and 0.09 ± 0.11 logMAR in the PanOptix and Pod FT group, respectively (P = .032). Mean IOL axis misalignment was 1.59 degrees ± 2.15 degrees (PanOptix group) and 1.89 degrees ± 3.31 degrees (Pod FT group) (P = .821). Mean magnitude of error of astigmatic correction was -0.09 diopters (D) and -0.11 D in the PanOptix group and Pod FT group, respectively (P = .333). Contrast sensitivity, QoV scores for the presence of photic phenomena, and the level of spectacle independence were similar in both groups (P > .05).

Conclusions: Both trifocal toric IOLs allowed complete patient visual restoration, and good spectacle independence and good visual quality outcomes. The PanOptix IOL provided superior intermediate visual acuity for distances around 60 cm.

Close abstract

Purpose: To compare visual outcomes after cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of 2 intraocular lenses (IOLs): extended range of vision and trifocal.

Methods: Each group of this prospective study comprised 40 eyes (20 patients). Phacoemulsification followed by bilateral implantation of a FineVision IOL (group 1) or a Symfony IOL (group 2) was performed. The following outcomes were assessed up to 1 year postoperatively: binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), binocular uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) at 60 cm, binocular uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) at 40 cm, spherical equivalent (SE) refraction, defocus curves, mesopic and photopic contrast sensitivity, halometry, posterior capsule opacification (PCO), and responses to a patient questionnaire.

Results: The mean binocular values in group 1 and group 2, respectively, were SE -0.15 ± 0.25 D and -0.19 ± 0.18 D; UDVA 0.01 ± 0.03 logMAR and 0.01 ± 0.02 logMAR; UIVA 0.11 ± 0.08 logMAR and 0.09 ± 0.08 logMAR; UNVA 0.06 ± 0.07 logMAR and 0.17 ± 0.06 logMAR. Difference in UNVA between IOLs (p<0.05) was statistically significant. There were no significant differences in contrast sensitivity, halometry, or PCO between groups. Defocus curves were similar between groups from 0 D to -2 D, but showed significant differences from -2.50 D to -4.00 D (p<0.05).

Conclusions: Both IOLs provided excellent distance and intermediate visual outcomes. The FineVision IOL showed better near visual acuity. Predictability of the refractive results and optical performance were excellent; all patients achieved spectacle independence. The 2 IOLs gave similar and good contrast sensitivity in photopic and mesopic conditions and low perception of halos by patients.

Close abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare a new diffractive trifocal toric lens with an apodized diffractive bifocal toric lens in terms of refractive and visual acuity (VA) outcomes, including low-contrast VA (LCVA), as well as the patient’s visual function 3 months after implantation.

Patients and methods: This is a randomized prospective study involving bilateral implantation of a trifocal toric or a bifocal toric lens. At 3 months postoperatively, the subject’s vision was tested both uncorrected and with his/her best distance correction at: distance (4 m), intermediate (63 cm), and near (40 cm). Binocular defocus curves were measured with no correction and with the subject’s best distance correction in place. Quality of vision was measured using the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire.

Results: A total of 22 patients were enrolled (eleven in each group). There was no statistically significant difference in the absolute change in measured rotation between 1 month and 3 months postoperatively between the two intraocular lens (IOL) groups (P=0.98). At 3 months, the postoperative refraction and distance VA by eye were similar between groups. There was no statistically significant difference in the measured LCVA between groups (P=0.39). The defocus curve showed that at 67 cm, the trifocal toric lens had statistically significantly better VA when compared to the bifocal toric lens. There were no statistically significant differences by group for any of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire scores (P>0.26 in all cases).

Conclusion: The trifocal toric IOL improved the intermediate vision without negatively impacting visual function and distance, near, or low-contrast VA when compared to a bifocal toric IOL. The toric component of the trifocal lens effectively reduced astigmatism and provided good rotational stability.

Close abstract