Extended Depth Of Focus Intraocular Lens Research Articles

Clinical Performance of an Extended Range of Vision Intraocular Lens After LASIK.

To evaluate the clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) of cataract surgery with implantation of a wavefront-shaping extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) in eyes with previous laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) for myopia correction. This prospective observational study enrolled 50 eyes with previous LASIK from 25 patients (age: 46 to 70 years) who underwent cataract surgery with implantation of the AcrySof IQ Vivity IOL (Alcon Laboratories, Inc). Visual and refractive outcomes were evaluated during a 3-month follow-up. PROMs were evaluated with the Intraocular Lens Satisfaction (IOLSAT; Alcon Vision, LLC) (general satisfaction), Catquest-9SF (difficulty in doing vision-related activities), and Questionnaire for Visual Disturbances (QUVID; Alcon Vision, LLC) (photic phenomena) questionnaires. Mean 3-month postoperative binocular uncorrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuities were 0.02 ± 0.11, -0.02 ± 0.09, and 0.14 ± 0.13 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), respectively. Mean binocular distance-corrected intermediate and near visual acuities were 0.05 ± 0.11 and 0.32 ± 0.14 logMAR, respectively. All eyes had a postoperative spherical equivalent within ±0.75 diopters (D). The mean defocus curve showed visual acuity values better than 0.20 logMAR for defocus levels from +0.50 to -1.50 D. Most patients (92.0%) confirmed that they had no vision-related difficulties limiting their normal daily life. Perception of starbursts, halos, glare, hazy vision, blurry vision, and double vision was referred by 24%, 24%, 28%, 28%, 8%, and 4% of patients, respectively. Most of symptoms were described as mild and not or a little bothersome. The wavefront-shaping EDOF IOL evaluated provides efficacious distance, intermediate, and near visual restoration in eyes with previous LASIK, with minimal photic phenomena associated. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(10):e742-e753.].

Visual and clinical outcomes after bilateral implantation of a novel extended depth of focus lens post cataract surgery.

To assess the visual and clinical outcomes after bilateral implantation of the novel extended depth of focus (EDOF) (AcrySof IQ Vivity) intraocular lens (IOL) using a micromonovision strategy. This was a prospective interventional study at a tertiary care center. Twenty patients (40 eyes) underwent bilateral implantation of AcrySof IQ Vivity IOL. Twelve weeks postoperatively, both uncorrected vision and corrected vision were assessed. Uniocular and binocular defocus curves with and without correction were noted subjectively as well as objectively on I-trace. Contrast sensitivity was assessed with a FACT (Functional Acuity Contrast Testing) machine, and objective parameters like modulation transfer function and Strehl ratio were also measured on I-Trace. Subjective quality of vision using a subjective questionnaire was also evaluated. The mean binocular postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity in LogMAR was -0.03 ± 0.09, the uncorrected intermediate visual acuity was 0.03 ± 0.09, and the uncorrected near visual acuity was 0.28 ± 0.18. All defocus curves were smooth and broad with the uncorrected defocus curve (with the micromonovision strategy) better than the corrected defocus curve. The subjective depth of focus (DOF = 3.73) was more than objective DOF (1.93) (P < 0.05). Photopic contrast was better than mesopic at all frequencies. All aberrations increased at 5 mm pupil size compared to 3 mm pupil size and were statistically significant, except for the total eye spherical aberration, which shows no significant difference at 3 mm and 5 mm pupil size (P = 0.27). Spectacle independence for distance, intermediate, and near was achieved in 100%, 94.7%, and 94.7% cases in this study, respectively. Using the micromonovision strategy, the visual performance of this novel EDOF IOL was outstanding both subjectively and objectively.

Stereopsis Following Implantation of Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: A Narrative Review.

Recent advancements in cataract surgery have broadened its scope from mere vision restoration to include correction of refractive errors and presbyopia. This evolution has introduced multifocal and extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses (IOLs), allowing enhanced vision across multiple distances. However, the influence of these advanced IOLs on stereopsis remains controversial. Factors influencing stereopsis after surgery include visual acuity, interocular differences, residual astigmatism, and the type of IOL, etc. Binocular vision integration and neuroadaptation further affect stereopsis, especially in cases of presbyopia-correcting IOLs. It is widely acknowledged that bilateral implantation of presbyopia-correcting IOLs yield superior stereopsis compared to unilateral implantation. However, there remains no consensus on whether binocular implantation of multifocal or monofocal IOLs provides superior stereopsis. Most studies suggest no significant difference in stereopsis between these two types of implants. Among different types of multifocal IOLs, refractive multifocal IOLs may offer better stereopsis than diffractive multifocal IOLs when implanted bilaterally. Emerging EDOF and hybrid multifocal-EDOF IOLs also demonstrate promising postoperative stereopsis. Additionally, a mix-and-match strategy with different types of IOLs implanted in each eye may result in interocular differences in visual acuity at certain distances, potentially affecting stereopsis. Nevertheless, with appropriate selection, most patients can achieve satisfactory postoperative stereopsis. This review synthesizes current literature on the effects of presbyopia-correcting IOLs on postoperative stereopsis recovery following cataract surgery. Studies on stereopsis outcomes with different IOLs have yielded mixed results, urging further investigation for optimized surgical strategies and patient outcomes.

The Postoperative Visual and Refractive Outcomes of Trifocal and Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lenses in Patients with Different Biometric Characteristics.

We aimed to survey the potential correlation between biometric parameters and postoperative outcomes after implanting extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses (IOLs) and trifocal IOLs. A retrospective cohort study was conducted, and patients receiving EDOF or trifocal IOL implantations were included. In total, 36 and 26 eyes were enrolled in the EDOF and trifocal groups, respectively. The primary outcomes of this study were the postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), and spherical equivalent (SE). The generalized linear model was applied to evaluate the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of primary outcomes in patients with different biometric characters. The final UDVA of the EDOF group was significantly better than that of the trifocal group (p = 0.020), and the UNVA and SE did not show significant differences between the two groups throughout the postoperative period (all p > 0.05). In a multivariable analysis, the UDVA was significantly better in the EDOF group than in the trifocal group (p = 0.038). For the subgroup analysis, the high axial length (AXL) value correlated to a lower postoperative UDVA in the EDOF group (both p < 0.05). Additionally, a large white-to-white (WTW) diameter was related to worse postoperative UNVA in the trifocal group (p = 0.042), and a high AXL was associated with higher SE in both the EDOF and trifocal groups (both p < 0.05). In conclusion, a high AXL correlates to worse postoperative outcomes in both the EDOF and trifocal IOLs, and trifocal IOL outcomes could be affected by large WTW diameters.

Clinical outcomes and optical performance of a new segmental refractive extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens

BackgroundThe visual performance and the optical quality of a segmental refractive extended depth-of-focus (EDoF) intraocular lens (IOL) were evaluated in a prospective, single-arm, single-center study.MethodsA total of 20 patients (40 eyes) after bilateral implantation of the refractive segmental EDoF Acunex Vario AN6V were included. Assessment procedure: refraction outcome, monocular and binocular uncorrected (UCVA) and distance-corrected visual acuity (DCVA), defocus curve, contrast sensitivity (CS), higher-order aberrations (HOAs) and patient satisfaction were evaluated 1 and 3 months after surgery.ResultsAt 3-month follow-up, mean spherical equivalent was − 0.23 ± 0.32 D. Binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (VA) at distance, intermediate and near was − 0.08 ± 0.06 logMAR at 4 m, -0.03 ± 0.06 logMAR at 66 cm and 0.16 ± 0.06 logMAR at 40 cm, respectively. The binocular defocus curve showed a VA better than 0.20 logMAR over a range from + 1.50 to − 2.45 D. Contrast sensitivity aligned with monofocal lenses, highlighting the lens’s clinical value. Aberrometry showed minimal changes in corneal aberrations. NEI-RQL-42-Questionnaire showed a high patient satisfaction for daily activities and revealed reduced dependence on glasses, particularly for near and intermediate vision. The Acunex Vario AN6V demonstrated minimal dysphotopsias, making it a promising option for those seeking spectacle independence.ConclusionThis segmental refractive EDoF IOL provides a high degree of spectacle independence for far and intermediate distances with functional near VA. Although inducing residual coma aberrations, it showed subjectively good results with little dysphotopsias.Trial registrationThis study protocol was reviewed and approved by ethics committee of Charité University, Berlin, Germany, with approval number EA4/126/20.

Performance of Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens in Eyes with Preexisting Retinal Disease

Introduction: Extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) offers improved near and intermediate vision, aiming to reduce spectacle dependence in cataract patients. This research aimed to evaluate the performance of EDOF IOL in patients with retinal pathologies following cataract surgery. Methods: The medical charts of thirty-three eyes with retinal pathologies and 100 healthy eyes that underwent cataract extraction with implantation of an EDOF IOL and had at least 3 weeks of postoperative follow-up were retrospectively included. Patients’ overall satisfaction, spectacle dependence, visual perception, and side effects were evaluated with a self-reported questionnaire. Results: Mean uncorrected visual acuities (LogMAR) were significantly better in the healthy eyes compared with the eyes with retinal pathologies: 0.05 and 0.10, p = 0.011 (distance), 0.06 and 0.16, p = 0.001 (intermediate), and 0.20 and 0.28, p = 0.026 (near), respectively. No or rare use of spectacles for any distance was reported by 71% and 38% of patients, respectively (p = 0.004). Haloes/glare were reported by 17% and 23%, respectively (p = 0.556); only in 7% and 4% it was clinically disturbing (p > 0.999). The same IOL would be chosen again in 77% and 73% of patients, respectively, (p = 0.550). Conclusion: Patients with retinal pathologies who were implanted with an EDOF IOL demonstrated excellent distant uncorrected visual results with reasonable intermediate and near uncorrected visual results alongside high satisfaction; however, results were inferior to those of the control healthy eyes.

Changes in visual performance after implantation of different intraocular lenses.

To evaluate the trending visual performance of different intraocular lenses (IOLs) over time after implantation. Ninety-one patients received cataract surgery with implantations of monofocal (Mon) IOLs, segmental refractive (SegRef) IOLs, diffractive (Dif) IOLs, and extended-depth-of-focus (EDoF) IOLs were included. The aberrations and optical quality collected with iTrace and OQAS within postoperative 6mo were followed and compared. Most of the visual parameters improved over the postoperative 6mo. The postoperative visual acuity (POVA) of the Mon IOL, SegRef IOL, and EDoF IOL groups achieved relative stability in earlier states compared with the Dif IOL group. Nevertheless, the overall visual performance of the 3 IOLs continued to upturn in small extents within the postoperative 6mo. The optical quality initially improved in the EDoF IOL group, then in the Mon IOL, SegRef IOL, and Dif IOL groups. POVA and objective visual performance of the Mon IOL and EDoF IOL groups, as well as POVA and visual quality of the Dif IOL group, improved in the postoperative 1mo and stabilized. Within the postoperative 6mo, gradual improvements were observed in the visual acuity and objective visual performance of the SegRef IOL group, as well as in the postoperative optical quality of the Dif IOL group. The visual performance is different among eyes implanted with different IOLs. The findings of the current study provide a potential reference for ophthalmologists to choose suitable IOLs for cataract patients in a personalized solution.

Optical benchtop evaluation of special intraocular lens optics

Intraocular lenses (IOL) featuring complex optical designs can pose achallenge in understanding their performance, which may hinder making an informed decision when selecting suitable lenses for patients. This underlines the importance of collecting optical quality data of IOLs and making them available. The deployment of benchtop systems for IOL testing offers not only insights into the design features of various IOL solutions but also provides aplatform for objective comparisons of special optics designs, including information about their susceptibility to photic phenomena. Recent advances in IOL testing have improved the ability to predict functional effects on visual acuity and contrast sensitivity from objective optical quality metrics. This, for instance, can be used to study monofocal lenses and the impact of asphericity on vision and IOLs tolerance to misalignment. Monofocal-plus IOLs consistently show only aslight improvement in the depth of focus when tested on the optical bench and in clinical settings. Although the pupil dependence found in this technology may limit the advantages of monofocal-plus over standard monofocal technology to extend the range of vision, it is the key to reduce photic phenomena. Refractive and diffractive extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOLs can effectively enhance intermediate vision, with the latter offering aslightly broader depth of focus but potentially increasing the risk of dysphotopsia. However, the limitation of EDOF IOLs is that they often fail to deliver spectacle independence for reading, which can be overcome by trifocal technology. Still, the available trifocal IOLs differ in their location of intermediate and near foci and the susceptibility to produce glare effects. Therefore, the knowledge from optical benchtop testing of IOLs can support optimizing the IOL selection by aligning the patient's visual needs with the IOL's properties, setting the right expectations, and assessing the risk profile for the occurrence of photic phenomena, potentially leading to improved decision-making.

Fellow-Eye Comparison of Monocular Visual Outcomes Following Monofocal Extended Depth-of-Focus (EDOF) and Trifocal EDOF Intraocular Lens Implantation

To compare intraindividual monocular visual performance of a monofocal extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) and a trifocal EDOF intraocular lens (IOL) following bilateral cataract surgery. Single-center, prospective, fellow-eye comparison clinical trial. All patients received uneventful bilateral cataract surgery with implantation of the monofocal EDOF Isopure IOL in the dominant eye and the trifocal EDOF FineVision Triumf IOL in the nondominant eye. Intraindividual monocular comparison included visual acuity at various distances, defocus curves, internal total higher-order aberration (HOA), spherical aberration (SA) Z(4.0), IOL decentration, and tilt. Additionally, subjective outcomes were evaluated using Halo and Glare simulation and the Seven-Item Visual-Functioning Index questionnaire. In total, 25 patients (50 eyes) were included. Intraindividual monocular best-corrected distance visual acuity, distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity, and best-corrected near visual acuity were comparable (P > .05). However, monocular contrast acuity (P = .019), distance-corrected near visual acuity (P < .001), and defocus curves at defocus levels of 0.0 D (P = .005) and between -1.5 and -4.0 D (P < .001) differed significantly. At 5 mm, internal HOA and SA Z(4.0) were significantly different (P < .001) and comparable at 3-mm pupil diameter, as were IOL tilt and decentration (P > .05). In this combined fellow-eye comparison, near vision was significantly better with the trifocal EDOF IOL. The monofocal EDOF IOL demonstrated similar distance and intermediate visual performance as the trifocal EDOF IOL. Overall, low values of photic phenomena and visual impairment were observed.

Fabrication and performance evaluation of a design for an extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens based on an improved sinusoidal profile.

This study presents the fabrication and evaluation of a sinusoidal extended depth-of-focus (EDoF) intraocular lens (IOL) based on our previously proposed design approach. The power, through-focus MTF, and surface profile were measured using commercial instruments. Through-focus images of a United States Air Force (USAF) 1951 resolution target formed by the fabricated IOL were compared with Symfony and AR40E under monochromatic and polychromatic light using optical bench testing. Simulations assessed visual acuity (VA) of a pseudophakic model eye with the EDoF IOL, including evaluation of tilt and decentration effects. Results indicate that the base power, add power, and the through-focus MTF@50 lp/mm of the fabricated IOL at a 3 mm pupil size align with the design specifications. The extended-depth-of-focus and imaging performance for the far vision of the fabricated IOL under both monochromatic and polychromatic light conditions at a 3.0 mm pupil diameter is comparable to that of Symfony. In addition, the fabricated IOL exhibits a similar extended-depth-of-focus for three discrete wavelengths. The pseudophakic model eye with the designed EDoF IOL demonstrates a VA exceeding 0.1 logMAR within a defocus range of 2.44 D. The VA is tolerant to both IOL tilt and decentration. These findings demonstrate the promising potential of the sinusoidal EDoF IOL design for future applications in cataract surgery.

Retinal Image Quality Through an Operating Microscope With Wavefront Shaping Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens in Model Eye

To compare the quality of images of gratings placed in a model eye viewed through an extended depth of focus (EDoF) intraocular lens (IOL) to that of diffractive bifocal IOL or monofocal IOL. Experimental laboratory investigation. Nondiffractive wavefront shaping EDoF (CNAET0, Alcon Laboratories), echelette-designed EDoF (ZXR00V, Johnson & Johnson Vision), diffractive bifocal IOL with low power addition (SV25T, Alcon Laboratories), or monofocal IOL (CNA0T0, Alcon Laboratories) was placed in a fluid-filled model eye. A United States Air Force Resolution Grating Target was glued to the posterior surface of the model eye and viewed through a flat or a wide-angle contact lens. The contrast of the gratings viewed through the EDoF or multifocal IOLs was compared to that through the monofocal IOL. A wavefront analyzer was used to measure the spherical power of the central 4.5 mm optics of the EDoF, multifocal, and monofocal IOLs. The distribution of the dioptric power and the dioptric power map were compared. The gratings observed through the flat contact lens with CNAET0, ZXR00V, or SV25T were slightly blurred when viewed through the multifocal optics. The blurred area was in the circumferential area of CNAET0, the central area of SV25T, and the peripheral area of ZXR00V. The mean contrast was 0.258 ± 0.020 for CNAET0, 0.227 ± 0.025 for ZXR00V, and 0.221 ± 0.020 for SV25T for the 16.0 cyc/mm grating. The contrast was significantly lower for ZXR00V (P = .004) and SV25T (P = .004) than 0.303 ± 0.015 for CNA0T0 but the differences were not significant for CNAET0. For the wide-angle contact lens, the contrast for CNAET0 was 0.182 ± 0.009, for ZXR00V was 0.162 ± 0.011, and for SV25T was 0.163 ± 0.007 for the 16.0 cyc/mm grating, and none was significantly different from 0.188 ± 0.012 for CNA0T0. The dioptric variations of CNAET0 indicated a ring-shaped area of higher power corresponding to the circumferential blurred zone observed through the flat contact lens. The wavefront shaping and echelette-designed EDoF-IOLs reduce the contrast of the grating more than the monofocal IOL when viewed through the flat contact lens. The degree of reduction depended on the design of the extended-focus optics. The difference was less through the wide-angle contact lens.

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

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.

Comparatively analysing the postoperative optical performance of different intraocular lenses: a prospective observational study

BackgroundPostoperative performance, including best corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA) and optical metrics (from the OQAS and iTrace devices), was compared among 4 different intraocular lenses (IOLs).MethodsThis prospective observational study included 104 eyes from 104 subjects who underwent cataract surgery combined with implantation of 4 different IOLs: monofocal (Mon) IOLs, segmental refractive (SegRef) IOLs, diffractive (Dif) IOLs and extended depth of focus (EDoF) IOLs. Postoperative BCDVA and optical metrics were collected at the 6th month. The OQAS optical metrics included the objective scattering index (OSI), Strehl ratio (SR), modulation transfer function (MTF) cut-off frequency, and predicted visual acuity (PVA); the iTrace optical metrics included blur/double vision, glare/halo, starburst, mixed focus, night myopia, and night hyperopia.ResultsThere was no significant difference in BCDVA among the 4 groups (P = 0.059; power = 70.3%). Differences were observed in all OQAS optical metrics among the groups (all P < 0.001). Overall, Mon IOLs and EDoF IOLs exhibited better performance than Dif IOLs and SegRef IOLs. Starburst was the only iTrace optical metric that differed among the groups (P < 0.001): SegRef IOLs caused more starbursts than Mon IOLs (P = 0.001), Dif IOLs (P = 0.006) and EDoF IOLs (P < 0.001). Spearman rank correlation analysis was used to determine the relationships among the iTrace optical metrics, OQAS optical metrics and BCDVA: starburst was negatively correlated with BCDVA, PVA at contrasts of 100% and 20%, OSI, and MTF cut-off frequency (all P ≤ 0.001); mixed focus was positively correlated with BCDVA, PVA at contrasts of 100% and 20%, OSI, and MTF cut-off frequency (all P ≤ 0.001).ConclusionsPostoperative BCDVA and optical metrics varied among the different IOLs, which should be taken into account in the selection and management of IOLs for cataract patients.Trial registrationThis study was approved by the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University Ethical Review Board (No. 50 2022).

Systematic bibliometric analysis of research hotspots and trends on the application of premium IOLs in the past 2 decades.

To analysis of research hotspots and trends on the application of premium intraocular lens (PIOLs) in the past 2 decades. The literature search was performed on the Web of Science and included PIOLs studies published between January 2000 and December 2022. The retrieved literature was collated and analyzed by R-tool's Bibliometrix package, CitNetExplorer, CiteSpace and other software. A total of 1801 articles about PIOLs were obtained, most of which were published in Spain and the United States. The organization that published the most articles was the University of Valencia in Spain. Alió JL, and Montés-Micó R, from Spain were the most influential authors in this field. The Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery and Journal of Refractive Surgery were the core journals for this field; the top 10 cited articles mainly focus on postoperative satisfaction with multifocal intraocular lens (IOLs) and postoperative results of toric IOLs. Through the keyword analysis, we found that trifocal IOLs, astigmatism and extended depth of focus (EDoF) IOLs are the most discussed topics at present, and the importance of astigmatism and the clinical application of the new generation of PIOLs are the emerging research trends. Bibliometric analysis can effectively help to identify multilevel concerns in PIOLs research and the prevailing research trends in the realm of PIOLs encompass the adoption of EDoF IOLs, trifocal IOLs, and their respective Toric models.

Comparative efficacy and safety of all kinds of intraocular lenses in presbyopia-correcting cataract surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

To assess the efficacy and safety of various intraocular lenses (IOLs), including standard monofocal, bifocal, trifocal, extended depth of focus (EDOF), and enhanced monofocal IOLs, post-cataract surgery through a network meta-analysis. A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted to identify relevant studies from the past 5 years. Parameters such as binocular visual acuities, spectacle independence, contrast sensitivity (CS), and optical quality were used to evaluate efficacy and safety. Data from the selected studies were analyzed using Review Manager 5.4 and STATA 17.0 software. Twenty-eight Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comprising 2465 subjects were included. Trifocal IOLs exhibited superior uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) compared to monofocal IOLs (MD: -0.35; 95% CI: -0.48, -0.22). Both trifocal (AcrySof IQ PanOptix IOLs group MD: -0.13; 95% CI: -0.21, -0.06) and EDOF IOLs (MD: -0.13; 95% CI: -0.17, -0.09) showed better uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) than monofocal IOLs. Trifocal IOLs ranked highest in spectacle independence at various distances (AT LISAtri 839MP group: SUCRA 97.5% for distance, 80.7% for intermediate; AcrySof IQ PanOptix group: SUCRA 83.0% for near). For cataract patients who want to treat presbyopia, trifocal IOLs demonstrated better visual acuity and spectacle independence at near distances. Different types of trifocal IOL characteristics differ. EDOF and enhanced monofocal IOLs have improved visual quality at intermediate distances.Therefore, It is very important to select the appropriate IOLs based on the lens characteristics and patient needs.

Tolerance to refractive error with a new extended depth of focus intraocular lens

PurposeTo evaluate the tolerance to refractive errors of a new purely refractive extended depth of focus (EDF) intraocular lens (IOL) using preclinical and clinical metrics.MethodsPreclinical evaluation included computer simulations of visual acuity (sVA) and dysphotopsia profile of different IOL designs (refractive EDF, diffractive EDF, multifocal, standard, and enhanced monofocals) using an appropriate eye model with and without ±0.50 D defocus and/or +0.75 D of astigmatism. Patients bilaterally implanted with a refractive EDF (Model ZEN00V) or an enhanced monofocal (Model ICB00) IOL from a prospective, randomized study were included. At the 6-month postoperative visit, uncorrected and corrected distance vision (UDVA and CDVA), visual symptoms, satisfaction and dependency on glasses were evaluated in a subgroup of patients with absolute residual refractive error of >0.25 D in one or both eyes.ResultsIn the presence of defocus and astigmatism, sVA was comparable for all except the multifocal IOL design. The refractive EDF was more tolerant to myopic outcomes and maintained a monofocal-like dysphotopsia profile with defocus. Binocular logMAR UDVA was −0.03 ± 0.08 for ZEN00V and −0.02 ± 0.11 for ICB00. 100% ZEN00V and 97% ICB00 patients did not need glasses and were satisfied with their distance vision. Monocular CDVA, contrast sensitivity and visual symptoms were also similar between both groups.ConclusionsThe clinical outcomes of the refractive EDF IOL demonstrated high quality distance vision and dysphotopsia comparable to a monofocal IOL, even in the presence of refractive error, thus matching the design expectations of the EDF IOL.

Quality of vision clinical outcomes for a new fully-refractive extended depth of focus Intraocular Lens.

To evaluate the visual performance of a purely refractive extended depth of focus (EDF) intraocular lens (IOL). A prospective, multi-center, randomized, subject/evaluator-masked study. Subjects were bilaterally implanted with the EDF test (Model ZEN00V, N = 60) or an enhanced monofocal control (Model ICB00, N = 57) IOL. Monocular corrected distance (CDVA), intermediate (DCIVA), near acuities (DCNVA) and patient reported visual symptoms were evaluated at the 6-month visit. Monocular mesopic contrast sensitivity (CS) and depth of focus (DOF) testing were assessed at 3 months. CDVA (Mean ± SD) was -0.06 ± 0.08 for test and -0.05 ± 0.08 logMAR for control groups. DCIVA was 0.13 ± 0.08 for test and 0.18 ± 0.14 logMAR for control groups (p = 0.0127). DCNVA was 0.37 ± 0.10 for test and 0.43 ± 0.16 logMAR for control groups (p = 0.0137). Test lens was statistically superior for intermediate and near. Overall, 91.7% (halos), 95.0% (starbursts) and 95.0% (glare) of test lens patients reported that they did not experience, were not bothered, or were slightly bothered by specific visual symptoms, compared to 98.2%, 100% and 96.5% in the control group. The DOF range over which monocular visual acuity was 0.20 logMAR or better was -1.6 D for the test lens. Mesopic CS was comparable between both groups, falling within 0.11 log units for all measured cycles per degree with and without glare. The EDF IOL demonstrated extended range of vision and statistically superior intermediate and near performance compared to the monofocal IOL. Distance visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and dysphotopsia profile were similar to the monofocal IOL.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) with Refractive and Diffractive Extended Depth of Focus (EDOF) Intraocular Lenses.

Extended depth of focus intraocular lenses (EDOF-IOLs) provide unaided far- and mid-range vision. Refractive IOLs, in contrast to diffractive designs, are associated with a lower depth of focus and absence of dysphotopsia. The aim of this study was to assess spectacle independence for far-range, mid-range, and near-vision activities in patients after implantation of refractive or diffractive EDOF-IOLs using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a real-world setting. In 2021 and 2022, all patients in a single center referred for bilateral cataract surgery were assigned to 7 experienced cataract surgeons who either bilaterally implanted only a diffractive EDOF-IOL (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, AT LARA Jena, Germany, three surgeons) or refractive EDOF-IOL (Johnson & Johnson Vision Inc., Tecnis Eyhance Irvine, California, USA, four surgeons) at the surgeon's discretion, with the aim of bilateral emmetropia. Six months after both cataract surgeries, all patients were contacted by telephone and asked to report their outcomes using a structured questionnaire investigating their spectacle usage for various daily activities and their experience with night glare or halos. Inclusion criteria were a normal postoperative visual potential based on the preoperative examination and completion of the questionnaire regarding postoperative visual experience. Of the patients, 514 underwent bilateral cataract surgery aiming for bilateral emmetropia with the implantation of EDOF-IOLs (422 with Tecnis Eyhance and 92 with AT LARA). A complete questionnaire was obtained from 472 (92%) patients, who were included in the study (393 vs. 79). Comparing Tecnis Eyhance with AT LARA IOL, 54 vs. 57% patients were able to perform most of their daily activities without spectacles, 9 vs. 19% reported not being dependent on spectacles at all, 25 vs. 29% reported using their smartphones without spectacles, 15 vs. 49% patients reported experiencing glares or halos at night, and 1 vs.15% with driving disturbance. Overall, 95 vs. 93% patients described themselves as "satisfied" or "highly satisfied" with their IOL. With both types of EDOF-IOLs, the majority of patients could perform most of their daily activities without spectacles, except reading, and were highly satisfied with their IOLs. Patients with diffractive Zeiss AT LARA EDOF-IOLs were more likely to accomplish unaided near-range visual tasks; however, they were also at a higher risk of experiencing glares or halos at night.

Comparison of modal and zonal wavefront measurements of refractive extended depth of focus intraocular lenses.

Extended depth-of-focus (EDoF) intraocular lenses (IOLs) are typically evaluated using commercially available aberrometers. Given the intricate optical design of these IOLs, employing an appropriate wavefront reconstruction method with a sufficient sampling resolution of the aberrometer is crucial. A high-resolution Shack-Hartmann wavefront sensor was developed by magnifying the pupil aperture by a factor of five onto a lenslet array (pitch: 133 µm) and utilizing a full-frame CMOS sensor (24 by 36 mm), resulting in a 26.6 µm sampling resolution. Zonal wavefront reconstruction was used and compared with Zernike-based modal wavefront reconstruction to retain detailed local slope irregularities. Four refractive EDoF IOLs with a power of 20D were examined, and the wavefront difference between the zonal and modal methods, expressed as the root mean squared error (RMSE), remained significant for two of the IOLs up to the 16th-order Zernike spherical aberrations (SAs). Conversely, a negligibly small RMSE was observed for the other two IOLs, as long as the Zernike SAs were higher than the 6th order. The raytracing simulation results from the zonal wavefronts exhibited a stronger correlation with the results of recent optical bench studies than those from the modal wavefronts. The study suggests that certain recent refractive EDoF IOLs possess a complex optical profile that cannot be adequately characterized by limited orders of SAs.

The effect of trifocal and extended-depth-of-focus intraocular lenses on optical coherence tomography parameters.

Optical properties of commonly used multifocal and extended-depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses (IOLs) can induce artifacts or changes in optical coherence tomography (OCT) measurements. Our purpose was to investigate the possible effects of different IOLs on peripapillary and macular OCT parameters. The preoperative and postoperative third-month peripapillary OCT and ganglion cell analysis (GCA) parameters of patients having monofocal (Alcon IQ), multifocal (PanOptix), or EDOF (Vivity) IOL implanted during cataract surgery were compared. Sixty-four eyes of 64 patients were included (21 monofocal, 24 multifocal, and 19 EDOF). Although all OCT image qualities increased postoperatively, only GCA image quality changes in the monofocal and multifocal groups reached statistical significance. Most peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) and GCA parameters were similar preoperatively and postoperatively. The superior RNFL thickness in the monofocal group and the temporal RNFL thickness in the EDOF group were higher postoperatively ( P = 0.04 and P = 0.02, respectively). Most GCA and RNFL value changes between preoperative and postoperative measurements were similar between groups. In the parameters that changed, postoperative values were higher in the monofocal group ( P = 0.02 for minimum ganglion cell layer and inner plexiform layer, P = 0.04 for average RNFL). Trifocal and EDOF IOLs do not seem to have a negative effect on OCT parameters.