In vitro optical assessment of three types of non-diffractive extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the in vitro optical performance of three types of non-diffractive extended depth-of-focus (EDoF) intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: Experimental study. Three Vivity IOLs, three Eyhance IOLs, and three ES60 IOLs were included. The professional optical bench OptiSpheric® IOL PRO 2 and an ISO-2 corneal model were applied. The through-focus modulation transfer function (MTF) and predicted visual acuity (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) of different spatial frequencies and different focuses under apertures of 3.0 mm and 4.5 mm were recorded. The aspheric monofocal (Tecnis ZCB00), diffractive EDoF (Tecnis Symfony), and trifocus (STF1) IOLs, as well as the lowest visual requirement criteria of EDoF IOLs of American Academy of Ophthalmology served as assessment controls. Results: For the 3.0-mm aperture, the peak value of the MTF was highest with ZCB00, followed by Eyhance, ES60, Vivity, Symfony, and STF1. All experimental non-diffractive EDoF IOLs had two MTF peaks, and the distance between both peaks was longest with Vivity (1.76 D), followed by ES60 (1.43 D) and Eyhance (1.36 D). Among the control IOLs, Symfony had two MTF peaks, and the peak MTF of the intermediate focus was highest. STF1 had three MTF peaks, and the peak MTF of the near focus was highest. For the 4.5-mm aperture, the ranking of the MTF peak of the six types of IOLs was the same as that for the 3.0-mm aperture. Vivity had an increased MTF peak of the distance focus, but a decreased intermediate focus MTF peak, while the MTF peaks of the distance, intermediate, and near focuses in the other IOLs decreased, compared to those for the 3.0-mm aperture. The predicted visual acuity of the distance focus of the three types of non-diffractive EDoF IOLs was all better than 0.0. The predicted visual acuity of the intermediate focus of the Vivity IOL and the ES60 IOL was 0.11 and 0.05 better than that of the Eyhance IOL, respectively. Based on the predicted visual acuity of 0.2, Vivity and ES60 had a depth of focus of at least 0.50 D exceeding ZCB00, while Eyhance had a depth of focus of 0.40 D exceeding ZCB00. Conclusion: In the experiments in vitro, the three types of non-diffractive EDoF IOLs exhibited varying degrees of intermediate to near focus optical performance while maintaining distance focus optical performance. The Eyhance IOL showed better distance focus optical performance than ES60 and Vivity IOL. The Vivity IOL and the ES60 IOL showed better depth of focus extensions than the Eyhance IOL and met the lowest visual requirement criteria of EDoF IOLs of American Academy of Ophthalmology.