Visual Performance of Eyes with Residual Refractive Errors after Implantation of an Extended Vision Intraocular Lens

Background. To analyze the tolerance on distance vision of different combined residual astigmatic situations in patients implanted with a novel wavefront shaping extended depth of focus (EDoF) intraocular lens (IOL). Methods. The study included patients implanted with the Acrysof® IQ Vivity® IOL. Uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) were measured three months after surgery, considering CDVA as the reference situation of the study. Distance VA was also measured in different refractive situations: (A) with 0.50 diopters (D) of positive (myopization) and negative (hyperopization) defocus and (B) with a residual mixed astigmatic refraction induced by adding a combination of −0.25 D spherical and 0.50 D cylindrical lenses placed in vertical (against the rule-ATR), oblique, and horizontal (with the rule-WTR) positions. Results. The study included 30 eyes of 30 patients. UDVA and CDVA were −0.04 ± 0.05 and −0.05 ± 0.05 logMAR, respectively. VA values with +0.50 D and −0.50 D of defocus were 0.01 ± 0.06 and 0.00 ± 0.04 logMAR, respectively. VA was better with distance correction (p<0.001) and no differences were found between the myopic and the hyperopic situations (p=0.09). Distance VA for the ATR, oblique, and WTR astigmatic situations was 0.01 ± 0.05, 0.01 ± 0.06, and 0.01 ± 0.04 logMAR, respectively. VA was better for the reference situation (p<0.001) and no differences were found among the three astigmatic situations (p=0.21). Conclusions. Low residual defocus and mixed astigmatic errors, regardless of its orientation, seem to be tolerated by patients implanted with the studied EDoF IOL. This trial is registered with NCT05392998. Registered 26 May 2022-Retrospectively registered

Changes in Optical Quality Induced by Tilt and Decentration of a Trifocal IOL and a Novel Extended Depth of Focus IOL in Eyes with Corneal Myopic Ablations

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of decentration and tilt combined with prior myopic ablations on the optical performance of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) and a novel IOL with an extended depth of focus (EDOF) design. METHODS: The XACT Mono-EDOF ME4 (Santen Pharmaceutical Co Ltd) and the trifocal FineVision (PhysIOL) IOLs were analyzed with and without simulated previous myopic ablations. The optical quality of the IOLs was evaluated with the PMTF optical bench (LAMBDA-X). The through-focus modulation transfer function (MTF) curves were recorded. Measurements were done for three situations: centered, 0.4 mm decentered, and 4 degrees tilted. RESULTS: The trifocal IOL showed three peaks of vision and the EDOF IOL showed a far distance peak with intermediate addition. When decentration or tilt were induced, the trifocal IOL showed negligible changes but the EDOF IOL showed a -0.50 diopters (D) shift of the overall curve. With simulated myopic ablation, the trifocal IOL showed a -0.50 D shift of the curve. When tilt or decentration were also induced, the better optical results were found at -1.00 D. With myopic ablations, the EDOF IOL showed a -0.50 D shift of the optical quality and when decentration or tilt were then induced, negative shifts over -1.00 D were found. CONCLUSIONS: The trifocal IOL was less affected by misalignments. When myopic ablations were induced, both lenses decreased their optical quality and the effects of misalignments were higher. In patients who have undergone corneal myopic ablation procedures, proper alignment of the implanted IOL and obtaining effective emmetropia becomes even more critical

Visual quality and patient satisfaction with a trifocal intraocular lens and its new toric version

Purpose: To assess and compare the visual quality and subjective outcomes of a trifocal spherical intraocular lens (IOL) and its new toric version. Setting: Clínica Rementería, Madrid, Spain. Design: Prospective case series. Methods: Patients had bilateral implantation of the AcrySof IQ PanOptix spherical or toric IOL. Three months postoperatively, monocular and the binocular uncorrected and corrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuities; binocular defocus curves; and binocular contrast sensitivity function (CSF) were assessed. Patient satisfaction was evaluated with the Catquest 9SF questionnaire. Results: The study comprised 250 eyes (166 with spherical IOL; 84 with toric IOL) of 125 patients. Both groups had good monocular visual acuity at all distances with no statistically significant differences between groups. The mean monocular uncorrected acuity in the spherical group was 0.06 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) ± 0.07 (SD), 0.20 ± 0.10 logMAR, and 0.05 ± 0.07 logMAR for far, intermediate, and near, respectively, and in the toric group, 0.07 ± 0.10 logMAR, 0.23 ± 0.20 logMAR, and 0.07 ± 0.12 logMAR, respectively. Defocus curves showed a visual acuity of 0.1 logMAR or better between −2.5 diopters (D) and +0.5 D with no differences between groups. The CSF values were within normal ranges with both IOLs. The questionnaire showed high rates of patient satisfaction with no differences between groups. Conclusions: The visual outcomes with the 2 IOLs were similar. With optimum implantation and alignment, the trifocal toric IOL seems to provide visual quality and patient satisfaction that is equivalent to that with the nontoric version with the same platform

Effect of residual astigmatism and defocus in eyes with trifocal intraocular lenses

Purpose: To assess the effect on visual function of different residual astigmatic situations combined with 0.50 diopters (D) negative defocus at different distances in patients with trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). Setting: Clínica Rementería, Madrid, Spain. Design: Prospective case series. Methods: The study included patients implanted with AcrySof IQ PanOptix IOL. Visual acuity (VA) was measured at far distance (0.00 D of vergence) and at -1.5 D, -2.5 D, and -3.0 D of vergence. Residual astigmatism was induced by adding 0.50 D and 1.00 D cylindrical lenses placed at 90 degrees (against the rule [ATR]), 45 degrees (oblique), and 180 degrees (with the rule). All measurements were made with distance correction (emmetropia as the reference situation) and with a simulated residual myopia of 0.50 D. Results: The study included 61 eyes of 61 patients. Residual astigmatism of 0.50 D and 1.0 D was induced in 28 and 33 eyes, respectively. For both groups, distance and intermediate VAs were better for the reference situation (P < .001 for all cases). With 1.0 D of cylinder (without and with induced defocus), the proportion of patients who lost ≥2 lines was higher for the ATR astigmatism. For near vision, differences were smaller for all simulated situations. Conclusions: Residual astigmatism of up to 0.50 D, regardless of its orientation, seems to be tolerated at all distances. For astigmatisms of 1.0 D, distance and intermediate VAs decreased significantly, and ATR orientations showed worse results in a higher proportion of patients. The combination of astigmatism with residual myopia significantly decreased distance VA, whereas this negative shift affected near VA less.Depto. de Optometría y VisiónFac. de Óptica y OptometríaTRUEpu

Evolution of Visual Acuity, Flap Thickness, and Optical Density After Laser in Situ Keratomileusis Performed With a Femtosecond Laser

Sin financiación3.351 JCR (2020) Q2, 18/62 Ophthalmology1.678 SJR (2020) Q1, 11/124 OphthalmologyNo data IDR 2020UE

Visual and Refractive Outcomes of Cataract Surgeries Performed in One Year in a Private Practice Setting: Review of 2714 Procedures

Introduction. Currently available outcome data for cataract surgery include mostly patients from public health systems. The purpose of this study was to report the visual and refractive outcomes of cataract procedures performed during one year in a private practice center, which may include a different spectrum of patients. Methods. Our center’s database was used to identify all isolated cataract procedures performed during 2017. The electronic records were reviewed to collect the preoperative information, presence of intra- or postsurgical complications, and visual and refractive outcomes one month after surgery. Results. In 2017, 2714 eyes of 1543 patients underwent cataract surgery in our center. Mean patient age was 70.42 years. 775 eyes (28.55%) had prior ophthalmic pathologies, and 113 eyes (4.16%) had undergone previous surgical procedures. Surgical complications developed in 35 eyes (1.29%), including 9 posterior capsule tears (0.33%) and 3 cases of dropped lens fragments (0.11%). A toric or multifocal intraocular lens was implanted in 45.6% of eyes. As regards postoperative complications, 59 eyes (2.17%) required a return to the operating theater, including 29 eyes (1.07%) requiring reinterventions due to an unexpected refractive result. There were no cases of endophthalmitis. Mean LogMAR-corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) improved from 0.25 (SD 0.34) preoperatively to 0.04 (SD 0.17) postoperatively; 86.5% of eyes achieved a CDVA ≤0.0, with 97.5% achieving ≤0.3. In 86.4% of eyes, the difference between target and residual spherical equivalent difference was of 0.50 D or lower; 88% of eyes had a spherical equivalent ±0.50 D. Conclusions. The visual and refractive outcomes of cataract surgery in a private practice setting were excellent, well over the benchmarks set by the ESCRS. The safety profile was also within expected standards. This study provides information for ophthalmologists in private practice on expected outcomes

Tolerance to Residual Refractive Errors After Trifocal and Trifocal Toric Intraocular Lens Implantation

Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the impact of 0.50 diopter (D) positive or negative defocus on visual function in patients implanted with trifocal and trifocal toric intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: The study included patients implanted with the AcrySof IQ PanOptix IOL or the PanOptix Toric. Visual acuity (VA) at high (100%), medium (50%) and low (10%) contrast, contrast sensitivity function (CSF), and halo perception were assessed three months after surgery. Explorations were performed with corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), with a positive defocus of +0.50D (myopization) and with a negative defocus of −0.50D (hyperopization). Results: The study included 60 eyes of 60 patients (30 eyes with PanOptix and 30 eyes with PanOptix Toric). For both groups, VA was better for all contrast settings at the CDVA situation (P<0.05 in all cases). For low spatial frequencies, no differences in CSF were found among the three refractive situations in either group. For higher frequencies, the results showed an overall trend for better CSF results for the CDVA situation. The halo effect was lower for the CDVA situation if compared to myopization and hyperopization in both the PanOptix and the PanOptix Toric groups (P<0.05 for all cases). Conclusions: There is an impact on visual quality and halo perception in patients implanted with trifocal or trifocal toric IOLs even for low residual refractive errors

Visual Function and Patient Satisfaction with Multifocal Intraocular Lenses in Patients with Glaucoma and Dry Age-Related Macular Degeneration

Purpose. To report visual function and self-reported satisfaction of patients with glaucoma and dry age-related macular degeneration (dAMD) implanted with multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOL). Methods. Patients with glaucoma or dAMD as well as healthy individuals implanted with MIOL were invited to participate. Explorations performed were uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA and CDVA), low-contrast visual acuity (LCVA), binocular contrast sensitivity, and defocus curves. Patients completed the Catquest-9 questionnaire and reported on the presence of dysphotopsias and the need for spectacles. Results. 38 subjects were included: 11 in the healthy/control group and 9 each in the preperimetric glaucoma, perimetric glaucoma, and dAMD groups. Controls had statistically better monocular UDVA, CDVA, and LCVA than patients with glaucoma and dAMD, as well as better binocular acuity in the defocus curves between −2.00 D and +0.50 D. Differences between controls and patients with preperimetric glaucoma were not statistically significant. Between −3.0 D and +0.5 D, all groups except dAMD achieved acuities better than 0.2 logMAR. Patients with dAMD had worse contrast sensitivity than all others for 3 cycles per degree (cpd), and patients with glaucoma had worse values than all others for 12 cpd; other differences did not reach statistical significance. Healthy subjects and patients with preperimetric glaucoma perceived halos more often than patients with glaucoma or dAMD, while suffering less from glare. Patients with glaucoma and dAMD found more difficulties when driving at night and required spectacles for near more often than the other subjects. Patients with dAMD were less satisfied with their vision. Conclusions. MIOLs may be implanted in patients with preperimetric glaucoma with little fear of patient dissatisfaction. In glaucoma and dAMD, MIOLs might be considered with caution, after explaining the increased risk of glare and the higher need for spectacle correction for reading