Monofocal Intraocular Lens Group Research Articles

Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lenses in Fuchs' Endothelial Dystrophy Patients: Results from Triple Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Procedure.

Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) is currently regarded as the most effective surgical procedure for addressing Fuchs Endothelial Corneal Dystrophy (FECD), frequently performed in conjunction with cataract surgery. In this retrospective study, we present a comparison of visual performance, clinical outcomes, and optical quality between two types of monofocal Intraocular Lenses (IOLs): one standard and one enhanced intermediate vision model, implanted in patients who underwent combined phacoemulsification and DMEK surgery. This single center comparative retrospective study was conducted at the Eye Clinic of the University of Florence (Italy) and included a total of 48 eyes of 48 patients affected by FECD and cataract. All patients underwent combined DMEK with phacoemulsification procedures. The patients' data were analyzed and divided into two groups: one group (standard group) consisted of 24 eyes that underwent phaco-DMEK with implantation of a monofocal IOL, and the second group (enhanced monofocal group) included 24 eyes that underwent phaco-DMEK with implantation of an enhanced monofocal IOL. In both groups, the following monocular visual outcomes were evaluated 6 months after surgery: Uncorrected Distance Visual Acuity (UDVA) and Best-Corrected Distance Visual Acuity (BCDVA) at 4 mts; Uncorrected Intermediate Visual Acuity (UIVA), Distance-Corrected Intermediate Visual Acuity (DCIVA) at 66 cm; Uncorrected Near Visual Acuity (UNVA) and Best Corrected Near Visual Acuity (BCNVA). Monocular defocus curves were also assessed. Furthermore, optical quality in terms of Contrast Sensitivity (CS) in photopic conditions, Higher-Order Aberrations (HOAs) at a pupil size of 5 mm. Modulation Transfer Function (MTF), Objective Scatter Index (OSI), and Strehl ratio, were also analyzed. A Patient-Reported Spectacle Independence Questionnaire was revised to evaluate spectacle independence outcomes. the two groups did not exhibit statistically significant differences in terms of UDVA, BCDVA, UNVA and BCNVA, photopic CS, HOAs, OSI, Strehl ratio, and MTF. However, in the phaco-DMEK enhanced monofocal IOL group, significantly better results were observed in terms of UIVA and DCIVA as well as a different defocus curve profile at 1.50 D, providing better defocus results at intermediate distance compared with the ZCB00 IOL. In our study, we found that enhanced monofocal lens performed favorable visual outcomes, even in cases of FECD, compared to standard monofocal IOLs. Comparable optical quality observed in the Eyhance group could allow surgeons to consider these lenses as a viable option for selected patients with FECD.

Improved Intermediate Visual Function with New Monofocal Intraocular Lens in Combined Cataract and Vitrectomy Surgery for Retinal Disease.

To evaluate the usefulness of a newly generated monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) in patients with various retinal diseases who underwent combined cataract and pars plana vitrectomy surgery. This prospective observational study included 33 patients with various retinal diseases. Monocular best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA), uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UCIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UCNVA), and contrast sensitivity were measured and compared with 40 age-matched patients in the standard monofocal IOL. The Eyhance IOL group demonstrated significantly better UCIVA at 6 months follow-up compared to the standard monofocal IOL group. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in contrast sensitivity, BCDVA, UCDVA, or UCNVA. The regression analysis showed a significant association between preoperative corrected distance visual acuity and improved UCIVA in the Eyhance IOL group. The Eyhance ICB00 IOL proved to be a valuable option for patients with retinal diseases undergoing combined cataract surgery and vitrectomy. It effectively improved intermediate vision without compromising contrast sensitivity or distance visual acuity.

Work Intensity of Postoperative Care Following Implantation of Presbyopia-Correcting versus Monofocal Intraocular Lenses.

To compare the work intensity of postoperative care following implantation of presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs) to that of standard monofocal IOLs. This open-label, multicenter, comparative study retrospectively reviewed the case records of cataract surgery patients who underwent bilateral implantation of either presbyopia-correcting IOLs (presby-IOL group; N=177) or standard monofocal IOLs (monofocal group; N=177). Outcome measures included the total time the patient spent in the office, number of visits, mean duration of visits, and the number of procedures and diagnostic tests during the first postoperative year. Outcome measures were compared between the first 90 days and days 91-365 after surgery. Mean (±SD) time spent in the office during the first postoperative year was 5:50 ± 3:35 hours (H:MM) over 6.6 ± 2.9 visits in the presby-IOL group, compared to 3:38 ± 1:36 hours over 4.9 ± 1.6 visits in the monofocal IOL group (p <0.001). During the first 90 days, a presby-IOL patient spent 40 minutes longer in the office than a monofocal IOL patient (3:39 ± 1:38 hours vs 2.59 ± 1:13 hours) (p <0.001). During days 91-365, time in the office was 1:32 hours longer (p <0.001), and the mean visit duration was 8 minutes longer for the presby-IOL patients (p=0.002) than those with monofocal IOL. In addition, the presby-IOL patients underwent more procedures and diagnostic tests (p ≤0.001) as compared with standard monofocal cataract surgery patients. Patients implanted with presbyopia-correcting IOLs require significantly more clinic time, diagnostic testing, and procedures postoperatively as compared with standard monofocal cataract surgery patients.

Clinical outcomes of bilateral implantation of new generation monofocal IOL enhanced for intermediate distance and conventional monofocal IOL in a Korean population

BackgroundTo compare the clinical outcomes of bilateral implantation of enhanced intermediate function intraocular lenses (IOLs) and standard monofocal IOLs.MethodsIn this prospective, randomized, comparative controlled study, we compared the visual outcomes of patients who underwent bilateral cataract surgery at the Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, with either enhanced monofocal IOLs (Tecnis Eyhance, ICB00, Johnson and Johnson Vision Care, Inc) (Group 1) or standard monofocal IOLs (Tecnis, ZCB00, Johnson and Johnson Vision Care, Inc) (Group 2). The assessment included monocular and binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate (UIVA at 60 cm) and near (UNVA at 40 cm) visual acuity, uncorrected defocus curves, contrast sensitivity testing (CST), and reading speed test using Quality of vision was evaluated using the Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25).ResultsAt 3-months postoperatively, monocular and binocular outcomes of UIVA and UNVA were statistically significantly better in Group 1 (P < 0.05). The binocular uncorrected defocus curve of Group 1 showed statistically significantly better outcomes at vergence ranges of -1.5 to -4.0 D (P < 0.05). Significantly higher reading speed test was also observed in Group 1 in all ranges tested (1.0 to 0.1 LogMAR) (P < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in CST between groups.ConclusionsBilateral implantation of enhanced monofocal IOLs provided better vision at intermediate and near distances compared to standard monofocal IOLs, while maintaining good distance vision and contrast sensitivity.

Outcomes of Laser Retinopexy for Retinal Tears in Pseudophakic Eyes with Multifocal Versus Monofocal Intraocular Lenses: A Matched Cohort Study

Purpose Performing laser retinopexy through multifocal intraocular lenses may be challenging due to aberrations of the peripheral retinal view. This study investigated the influence of multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses on outcomes of laser retinopexy for retinal tears. Methods Pseudophakic eyes (multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses) that underwent in-office laser retinopexy for retinal tears, with a minimum follow-up of 3 months, were retrospectively analyzed. Eyes with multifocal intraocular lenses were matched to controls with monofocal intraocular lenses in a 1:2 ratio for age, gender, number, and location of retinal tears. The main outcome measure was the rate of complications. Results We included 168 eyes in the study. Fifty-six eyes (51 patients) with multifocal intraocular lenses were matched with 112 eyes (112 patients) with monofocal intraocular lenses. The mean follow-up was 26 months. Baseline characteristics were similar between two groups. No significant differences were noted in the rate of successful laser retinopexy without additional procedures (91% vs. 86% at 3 months and 79% vs. 74% during follow-up, in the multifocal intraocular lens and monofocal intraocular lens group, respectively). No significant differences were observed in the rate of subsequent rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (multifocal, 4% vs. monofocal, 6%, p=.716) or need for additional laser retinopexy for new tears (14% vs. 15%; p=.939). The surgery rates for vitreous hemorrhage (0% vs. 3%; p=.537), epiretinal membrane (2% vs. 2%; p=.553), and vitreous floaters (5% vs. 2%, p=.422) were not significantly different. Visual outcomes were also similar. Conclusion Multifocal intraocular lenses did not appear to negatively impact the outcomes of in-office laser retinopexy for retinal tears.

Trifocal Intraocular Lens Implantation to Treat Visual Demands in Mongolian Patients

Objective: Intraocular lens (IOL) implants are artificial lenses which helps to clear up the vision after cataract surgery. In this work, we aimed to compare the monofocal and trifocal IOL implantation during phacoemulsification. Methods: 60 eyes of 60 patients were divided into 2 equal groups. Postoperative astigmatism and UCVA were measured and compared during week 1, week 2 and month. Results: The mean preoperative UCVA was 6.83 ± 4.61 in the monofocal IOL group, and 17.5 ± 17.55 in the trifocal IOL group. At the first week: The mean postoperative UCVA at one week was 35.46 ± 19.45 and 58.64 ± 20.77, in each group respectively. The mean postoperative BCVA in the first week was 42.71 ± 20.63 and 65.91 ± 20.85, in each group respectively. The mean postoperative UCVA at 1 month was 46.57 ± 24.37 and 76.36 ± 23.61, in each group, while BCVA was 63.14 ± 24.94 and 89.54 ± 14.63. There was a highly significant statistical difference between the result of UCVA preoperative and the results of UCVA at the early and last postoperative follow up. Conclusion: From our results, it is evident that post-operative near UCVA and BCVA was statistically significant at monofocal and trifocal groups.

Comparison of Visual Neuroadaptations After Multifocal and Monofocal Intraocular Lens Implantation.

Visual neuroadaptation is believed to play an important role in determining the final visual outcomes following intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. To investigate visual neuroadaptation in patients with age-related cataracts (ARCs) after phacoemulsification with multifocal and monofocal IOL implantation, we conducted a prospective, controlled clinical trial in Zhongshan Ophthalmology Center. This study included 22 patients with bilateral ARCs: 11 patients underwent phacoemulsification and multifocal IOL (Mu-IOL) implantation, and 11 patients underwent phacoemulsification and monofocal IOL (Mo-IOL) implantation. Visual disturbances (glare and halos), visual function (including visual acuity, retinal straylight, contrast sensitivity, and visual evoked potentials) and visual cortical function (fractional amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations, fALFF) in Bowman’s areas 17–19 as the region of interest were assessed before and after surgeries. The results showed that the fALFF values of the visual cortex in the Mu-IOL group decreased at 1 week postoperatively and recovered to baseline at 3 months and then improved at 6 months, compared with preoperative levels (at a whole-brain threshold of P < 0.05, AlphaSim-corrected, voxels > 228, repeated measures analysis of variance). Significantly increased fALFF values in the visual cortex were detected 1 week after surgery in the Mo-IOL group and decreased to baseline at 3 and 6 months. The fALFF of the lingual gyrus was negatively correlated with visual disturbances (P < 0.05). To conclude, early postoperative visual neuroadaptation was detected in the Mu-IOL group by resting-state fMRI analysis. The different changing trends of postoperative fALFF values in the two groups indicated distinct neuroadaptations patterns after Mu-IOL and Mo-IOL implantation.

Clinical differences between toric intraocular lens (IOL) and monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation when myopia is determined as target refraction

BackgroundThe aim of this study is to analyze and compare the clinical results of toric intraocular lens (IOL) and monofocal IOL implantation when the target refraction value is -3 diopter (D) in cataract patients with corneal astigmatism > 1.5 diopters (D).Methods We performed a retrospective chart review for patients with corneal astigmatism > 1.5D who underwent cataract surgery and their target refraction is -3D. 100 eyes (100 patients; monofocal IOL, 60; toric IOL, 40) were enrolled in the current study. Near and distant uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), corrected VA, spherical equivalent and refractive, corneal astigmatism were evaluated before and after surgery.ResultsThe near UCVA of the toric IOL group (0.26 ± 0.33) after cataract surgery was significantly better than that of the monofocal IOL group (0.48 ± 0.32) (p = 0.030). The distant UCVA of the toric IOL group (0.38 ± 0.14) was also significantly better than that of the monofocal IOL group (0.55 ± 0.22) (p = 0.026). Best-corrected visual acuity (p = 0.710) and mean spherical equivalent (p = 0.465) did not show significant differences between the toric IOL group and the monofocal IOL group. In the toric IOL group, postoperative refractive astigmatism was − 0.80 ± 0.46D and postoperative corneal astigmatism was − 1.50 ± 0.62D, whereas the corresponding values in the monofocal IOL group were − 1.65 ± 0.77D and − 1.45 ± 0.64D; residual refractive astigmatism was significantly lower with toric IOL implantation compared with monofocal IOL implantation (p = 0.001). There were no postoperative complications.ConclusionsWhen myopic refraction such as -3D was determined as the target power in patients with corneal astigmatism, toric IOL implantation led to excellent improvement in both near and distant UCVA.

Сравнение зрительных функций у пациентов после имплантации бифокальных, трифокальных и монофокальных интраокулярных линз

The widespread implantation of bifocal and trifocal Intraocular lenses (IOL) in the cataract surgery provides patients with a visual independence, however, at the same time some optical phenomena associated with the inner structure of multifocal IOLs may appear, that negatively affect functional results of cataract surgery. Therefore, a comparison of patients’ visual functions after implantation of tri-, bi- and mono-focal intraocular lenses seems topical. Purpose . To compare pseudo-accommodation abilities, contrast sensitivity, satisfactory subjective perception of cataract patients after implantation of refractive-diffractive bi-, tri- and mono-focal IOLs. Material and methods. This study included 150 patients (150 eyes). They were divided into three groups depending on the type of implanted lens: bifocal IOL (45 patients), trifocal IOL (45 patients), mono-focal IOL (the control group, 60 patients). Ultrasound cataract phacoemulsification with IOL implantation was performed in one eye of each patient. Patients were examined for the visual acuity at different distances and the contrast sensitivity function, as well as the subjective satisfaction was evaluated using a questionnaire. Results . An improved distance visual acuity was noted in all research groups, the near visual acuity was higher for implanted bi- and trifocal IOLs (0.64±0.09 and 0.61±0.10, respectively) compared with the mono­focal IOL (0.36±0.07), the visual acuity at medium distances was better for trifocal IOLs (0.61±0.14). The contrast sensitivity function was higher in the mono-focal IOL group. Therewith, the subjective satisfaction was higher for multifocal IOLs compared to mono-focal IOLs. It was revealed that such negative optical phenomena as glares and halos appeared more often after trifocal IOLs implantation (68.2%). The application of spectacles was required in patients of the bifocal IOL group in 22.1% of cases, in the trifocal IOL group in 17.9% of cases and in the mono-focal IOL group in 70.1% of cases. Conclusion . Implantation of multifocal IOLs compared to mono­focal IOLs provides a better pseudo-accommodation function and higher degrees of visual independence and subjective satisfaction compared to mono-IOL. This is offset by a higher frequency of optical phenomena negatively affecting the obtained functional results.

Trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis of toric versus monofocal intraocular lenses in cataract patients with bilateral corneal astigmatism in the Netherlands

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of toric versus monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in cataract patients with bilateral corneal astigmatism. Two ophthalmology clinics in the Netherlands. Prospective cost-effectiveness analysis. Resource-use data were collected over a 6-month postoperative period. Consecutive patients with bilateral age-related cataract and 1.25 diopters or more of corneal astigmatism were included in the economic evaluation. Patients were randomized to phacoemulsification with bilateral toric or monofocal IOL implantation. All relevant resources were included in the cost analysis. The base-case analysis was performed from a societal perspective based on quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The main outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The analysis comprised 77 consecutive patients (33 toric IOL; 44 monofocal IOL). Societal costs were higher in the toric IOL group (€3203 [$3864]) than in the monofocal IOL group (€2796 [US$3373]). QALYs were slightly lower in the toric IOL group (0.30 versus 0.31; P=.75). Toric IOLs were therefore inferior to monofocal IOLs from a cost-effectiveness perspective. The cost-effectiveness probability ranged from 1% to 15%, assuming a ceiling ratio for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €2500 to €20 000 per QALY. From a societal perspective, bilateral toric IOL implantation in cataract patients with corneal astigmatism was not cost-effective compared with monofocal IOL implantation. Copayment by patients should therefore be considered.

Changes in retinal nerve fiber layer thickness measurements in response to a trifocal intraocular lens implantation.

To determine the changes produced on the peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness, measured by an spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT), after the implantation of a trifocal diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) and compare them with the variations produced by a monofocal IOL implantation. A prospective, double masked study in which 50 eyes belonging to 50 patients with bilateral cataract were enrolled. Sequentially, the first 25 patients were bilaterally implanted with the trifocal diffractive IOL AT LISA® Tri 839 MP and the following 25 patients with the monofocal IOL CT ASPHINA® 409 M/MP. RNFL thickness measurements were performed by Cirrus HD®-OCT before and six months after the second eye surgery. Mean patient age was 69.5 ± 6.1 years. In response to surgery, the average RNFL thickness increased 7.29 ± 10.51 µm at the AT LISA® Tri group and 1.96 ± 2.90 µm at the monofocal IOL group from the baseline (p = 0.017). Statistically significant differences in thickness variations were also detected in the superior sector (7.86 ± 7.70 µm at the AT LISA® Tri group vs 1.73 ± 5.74 µm at the monofocal group). Statistically significant differences between the pre and the postsurgery measurements were found in all sectors except the inferior one with the trifocal IOL and in two of the studied sectors (average and temporal) with the monofocal IOL. The IOL implantation produce changes in the RNFL thickness, which are larger in case of a trifocal diffractive IOL.

Long-term clinical effect of aspheric multifocal intraocular lens implantation for developmental cataracts in childhood

Objective To observe the long-term visual quality and clinical effect of aspheric diffractive multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation for congenital and developmental cataracts in childhood. Methods A retrospective cohort study on multifocal IOL implantation for congenital and developmental cataracts in childhood (aged 8 to 14 years) was performed in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from August 2013 to January 2015.The clinical data of 67 eyes from 46 congenital cataract patients who received phacoemulsification with IOL implantation were collected.The AMO (ZMB00) IOL was implanted in 34 eyes of 24 patients in the multifocal IOL group, and Bausch & Lomb (MI60) IOL was implanted in 33 eyes of 22 patients in the monofocal IOL group.The distance, intermediate and near vision acuity were analyzed in 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery, including uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA). The wavefront aberrations, modulation transfer functions (MTF) and stereopsis were obtained with iTrace Analysis System, Optec-6500 Visual Functional Analyzer and Titmus Stereo Test Chart, respectively in 12 months after surgery.The near additional degree, removing glasses rate and myopic shift were compared between the two groups in postoperative 12 months. Results The intermediate and near UCVA in the multifocal IOL group were obviously better than those in the monofocal IOL group 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery (intermediate: Z=-3.74, -4.36, -3.66; all at P=0.00.near: Z=-2.67, -2.50, -2.33; all at P 0.05). The MTFs under the 5.0 mm optical zone and 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 c/d in the multifocal IOL group were insignificantly lower than those in the monofocal IOL group (all at P>0.05). In addition, the near stereopsis, near additional degree and myopic shift (ΔD) were reduced in the multifocal IOL group compared with monofocal IOL group (both at P 0.05). The myopic shifting rates were 16.7% and 83.3% in the multifocal IOL group and monofocal IOL group, with a significant difference between the two groups (χ2=15.02, P=0.00). Conclusions The aspheric multifical IOL implantation can achieve good and stable distance, intermediate and near visual acuities, provide better near stereopsis, reduce postoperative dependence on spectacles and decrease the incidence of myopic shift in child cataract patients. Key words: Congenital cataract; Intraocular lens; Prosthesis implantation; Aspheric; Multifocal; Wavefront aberration; Modulation transfer function; Childhood

Comparative analysis of clinical outcomes of a monofocal and an extended-range-of-vision intraocular lens in eyes with previous myopic laser in situ keratomileusis

To compare the clinical outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of a monofocal or an extended-range-of-vision intraocular lens (IOL). Hospital da Luz, Lisbon Portugal. Prospective case series. Patients who previously had myopic laserinsitu keratomileusis (LASIK) had cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of an extended-range-of-vision IOL (Tecnis Symfony) or amonofocal IOL (Tecnis ZCB00). Visual acuity, refraction, defocus curve, contrast sensitivity, photic phenomena, spectacle independence, and patient satisfaction were evaluated at 4 months postoperatively. The study comprised 44 patients (88 eyes), with 22 patients in each IOL group. No significant differences between groups were found postoperatively for most visual and refractive parameters (all P≥.27). However, binocular uncorrected intermediate and near visual acuities were significantly better in the extended-range-of-vision group (P<.01). The defocus curve of both IOLs differed more with increasing negative defocus (P<.01). No significant differences between IOLs were found in contrast sensitivity for any spatial frequency evaluated (P≥.05). Most of the patients did not perceive photic phenomena with either IOL. Mild glare was reported in 22.7% of the extended-range-of-vision patients and 9.1% of the monofocal group; mild halos were comparable with 13.6% in both groups. Spectacle dependence for intermediate vision and near vision was higher in the monofocal IOL group. The extended-range-of-vision IOL was a useful option to restore visual function after cataract surgery in eyes that previously had myopic LASIK surgery, offering levels of visual quality comparable to those achieved with the monofocal IOL.

Visual performance after bilateral implantation of 2 new presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses: Trifocal versus extended range of vision

To compare the visual outcomes and quality of vision of 2 new diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with those of a monofocal IOL. Fatebenefratelli e Oftalmico Hospital, Milan, Italy. Prospective case series. Patients had bilateral cataract surgery with implantation of a trifocal IOL (Panoptix), an extended-range-of-vision IOL (Symfony), or a monofocal IOL (SN60WF). Postoperative examinations included assessing distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity; binocular defocus; intraocular and total aberrations; point-spread function (PSF); modulation transfer function (MTF); retinal straylight; and quality-of-vision (QoV) and spectacle-dependence questionnaires. Seventy-six patients (152 eyes) were assessed for study eligibility. Twenty patients (40 eyes) in each arm of the study (60 patients, 120 eyes) completed the outcome assessment. At the 4-month follow-up, the trifocal group had significantly better near visual acuity than the extended-range-of-vision group (P=.005). The defocus curve showed the trifocal IOL had better intermediate/near performance than the extended-range-of-vision IOL and both multifocal IOLs performed better than the monofocal IOL. Intragroup comparison of the total higher-order aberrations, PSF, MTF, and retinal straylight were not statistically different. The QoV questionnaire results showed no differences in dysphotopsia between the multifocal IOL groups; however, the results were significantly higher than in the monofocal IOL group. Both multifocal IOLs seemed to be good options for patients with intermediate-vision requirements, whereas the trifocal IOL might be better for patients with near-vision requirements. The significant perception of visual side effects indicates that patients still must be counseled about these effects before a multifocal IOL is implanted.

The visual outcome after cataract surgery with multifocal intraocular lenses and monofocal intraocular lenses at tertiary care hospital: A prospective observational study

Background: The crystalline lens is part of the optical system of the eye that focuses rays of light on the retina. Apart from contributing to the optical power of the eye as a whole, the crystalline lens can dynamically change the optical power of the system by the process of accommodation for younger eyes. During life the ability of the crystalline lens to change in shape decreases, leading to presbyopia. For optimal visual performance, crystalline lens should be transparent. Cataract describes the pathological opacification of the crystalline lens. Removal of the crystalline lens followed by implantation of an artificial intraocular lens (IOL) in the capsular bag of the eye, as practiced in cataract surgery, offers an opportunity to address refractive anomalies in patients who are ametropic due to the removal of cataract. Implantation of an IOL with a fixed focal point (monofocal IOL) will render a patient at best emmetropic for a single fixed working distance only, leading to a postoperative result comparable to presbyopia in an emmetropic subject; pseudoaccommodation can play a role in increasing the depth of field but spectacle independence for a range of working distances is not be expected after implantation of a monofocal IOL. To restore the missing accommodation, we can implant multifocal IOLs. Multifocal IOLs, on the other hand, are designed to have two or more fixed focal points, thus, facilitating a sharp retinal image of objects at multiple working distances resulting in increased spectacle independence, but these lenses can cause a reduction in contrast sensitivity and higher incidence of photic phenomena such as halos, flare, and glare. Aim of The Study: The study was carried out with the aim of comparing the visual outcome after cataract surgery with multifocal IOLs and monofocal IOLs in respect to distant visual acuity, near visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, subjective symptoms, and to assess functional status and quality of life. Materials and Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted in the Department of Ophthalmology, KLES Dr. Prabhakar Kore Hospital and Medical Research Centre, Belagavi on patients undergoing cataract surgery during January 1, 2015–December 31, 2015. The study was approved by the Ethical and Research Committee of Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Belagavi. Forty eyes of forty patients who undergone phacoemulsification surgery with IOL implantation under LA. Choice of IOL inserted given according to their desire for spectacle independency. Monofocal group was taken as control. Both groups were evaluated postoperatively after 3 weeks and 6 weeks for distant vision, near vision, contrast sensitivity for distance, subjective satisfaction by standard questionnaire method and subjective symptoms such as glare and halos and difficulty in night driving. Data were analyzed by Chi-square test (P < 0.05%). Results: Distant visual acuity was 6/6–6/9 in 80% and 75% of the patients of multifocal and monofocal groups, respectively, remaining patients had 6/12–6/18 vision. 85% of multifocal group had N6–N8 vision (P < 0.0001). High contrast sensitivity for distance was almost similar in both groups, but low contrast was significantly reduced in multifocal group as compared to monofocal group (P = 0.0023). Fifteen percent of multifocal group had complained of glare and halos compared to monofocal group who never had these visual sensations. About 5% of patients in multifocal group had difficulty with nighttime driving. Nearly, 80% of patients in multifocal group and 40% of patients in monofocal group had become spectacles independent. Interpretation and Conclusion: Multifocal IOL group experienced reduced spectacle dependency for near vision and a high level of patient satisfaction despite some reports of halos, glare, and difficulty in night driving. Monofocal IOL group experienced spectacle dependency for near vision. Overall, multifocal IOLs offer best near vision acuity, good distance visual acuity, less limitation in visual function in selected and motivated individuals.

Combination of Toric and multifocal intraocular lens implantation in bilateral cataract patients with unilateral astigmatism.

To assess the binocular visual function in bilateral cataract patients with unilateral astigmatism after combined implantations of Toric with multifocal intraocular lens (IOL), and to compare with that of Toric and monofocal IOL implantation. All the 30 patients with unilateral astigmatism suffered bilateral cataract were randomly divided into two groups: Toric plus multifocal IOL group and Toric plus monofocal IOL group. Uncorrected and corrected visual acuity at distance (5.0 m), intermediate distance (0.6 m), and near (0.33 m), contrast sensitivity, and stereopsis were assessed 6mo after surgery. Patients were also surveyed for visual disturbances and spectacle dependence. Binocular uncorrected visual acuity (LogMAR) of Toric/multifocal IOL eyes at distance, intermediate, near were 0.05±0.05, 0.24±0.10, and 0.14±0.06 respectively. The values of Toric plus monofocal IOL eyes were 0.06±0.07, 0.26±0.08, and 0.37±0.10 respectively. These values did not indicate significant differences between two groups with exception of near visual acuity. In the photopic condition (with or without glare), the contrast sensitivity of multifocal IOL eyes was significant lower than the monofocal IOL eyes in 18 cpd. In the mesopic condition, the contrast sensitivity of multifocal group was significant lower than monofocal group in 12 cpd, and in mesopic glare condition, this significant difference was found both in 6 cpd and 12 cpd. The stereopsis of Toric/multifocal IOL eyes decreased slightly (100±80 seconds of arc, t=2.222, P=0.136). Mean near vision for patient satisfaction was statistically significantly higher in Toric/multifocal IOL group patients versus than that in Toric/monofocal IOL group (80% vs 25.5%, P=0.000). Visual disturbance was not noticed in either group. Although the combination of Toric and multifocal IOL implantation results in compromising stereoacuity, it can still provide patients with high levels of spectacle freedom and good overall binocular visual acuity.

Disk halo size measured in individuals with monofocal versus diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses

To compare disk halo size in response to a glare source in eyes with an aspheric apodized diffractive multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) or aspheric monofocal IOL. Rementeria Ophthalmological Clinic, Madrid, Spain. Prospective randomized masked study. Halo radius was measured using a vision monitor (MonCv3) with low-luminance optotypes in eyes that had cataract surgery and bilateral implantion of an Acrysof Restor SN6AD1 multifocal IOL or Acrysof IQ monofocal IOL 6 to 9 months previously. The visual angle subtended by the disk halo radius was calculated in minutes of arc (arcmin). Patient complaints of halo disturbances were recorded. Monocular uncorrected distance visual acutity (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) were measured using high-contrast (96%) and low-contrast (10%) logMAR letter charts. The study comprised 39 eyes of 39 subjects (aged 70 to 80 years); 21 eyes had a multifocal IOL and 18 eyes a monofocal IOL. The mean halo radius was 35 arcmin larger in the multifocal IOL group than the monofocal group (P < .05). Greater halo effects were reported in the multifocal IOL group (P < .05). The mean monocular high-contrast UDVA and low-contrast UDVA did not vary significantly between groups, whereas the mean monocular high-contrast CDVA and low-contrast CDVA were significantly worse at 0.12 logMAR and 0.13 logMAR in the multifocal than in the monofocal IOL group, respectively (P < .01). A significant positive correlation was detected by multiple linear regression between the halo radius and low-contrast UDVA in the multifocal IOL group (r = 0.72, P < .001). The diffractive multifocal IOL gave rise to a larger disk halo size, which was correlated with a worse low-contrast UDVA. None of the authors has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.

Cost-Effectiveness Comparison Between Monofocal and Multifocal Intraocular Lens Implantation for Cataract Patients in Taiwan

PurposeOur aim was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of monofocal and multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) for cataract patients in Taiwan. MethodsThis prospective nonrandomized study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of monofocal and multifocal IOLs by means of visual performance, visual quality, vision-related quality of life, and spectacle-independence rates. The direct costs were calculated using the payment points of the fee schedule for medical services multiplied by the treatment items. The concept of incremental cost effectiveness ratios was used to evaluate the costs of different types of IOLs in cataract surgery and postoperative outcomes in patients. FindingsA total of 61 patients from the monofocal IOL group (n = 21), multifocal IOL group 1 (n = 22), and multifocal IOL group 2 (n = 18) who completed the study were included in the analysis. No significant differences were observed in mean ages or patient to eye ratio. Significant differences in effectiveness after the implantations of monofocal and multifocal IOLs were observed for spectacle-free rate and monocular contrast sensitivity under glare conditions only. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of monofocal versus multifocal IOLs indicated that it cost an additional $57 to $58 (US dollars) to increase each 1% of the spectacle-independence rate. ImplicationsThis study’s results indicated that multifocal IOLs provided better effectiveness on vision-related indicators like the incremental cost effectiveness ratios of postoperative spectacle-independence rate and binocular best-corrected visual acuity measurements at near vision. Our findings suggest that multifocal IOLs can be highly cost effective for patients who prefer to be spectacle free, so it is important to ensure that patients have realistic expectations when making choices between monofocal and multifocal IOLs.

Reduction in Mean Deviation Values in Automated Perimetry in Eyes With Multifocal Compared to Monofocal Intraocular Lens Implants

To evaluate differences in mean deviation values in automated perimetry in healthy eyes with multifocal compared to monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) implants. Prospective, age-matched, comparative analysis. Single-center, tertiary referral academic practice. A total of 37 healthy eyes in 37 patients with bilateral multifocal (n=22) or monofocal (n=15) IOL implants were studied. INTERVENTION/OBSERVATION PROCEDURE: Humphrey Visual Field 10-2 testing was performed on all patients. Mean deviation (MD) and pattern standard deviation (PSD) numerical values were evaluated and compared between groups. The average MD was -2.84 dB (SD 2.32) for the multifocal IOL group and -0.97 dB (SD 1.58) for the monofocal IOL group (P=.006). There was no significant difference in PSD between the 2 groups (P=.99). Eyes that had the visual field 10-2 testing≥6 months from time of IOL placement showed no improvement in MD when compared to eyes that were tested within 6 months from IOL placement. Multifocal IOL implants cause significant nonspecific reduction in MD values on Humphrey Visual Field 10-2 testing that does not improve with time or neuroadaptation. Multifocal IOL implants may be inadvisable in patients where central visual field reduction may not be tolerated, such as macular degeneration, retinal pigment epithelium changes, and glaucoma.

Aberrometry in Patients Implanted With Accommodative Intraocular Lenses

To evaluate the objective accommodative response, change of aberrations, and depth of focus in eyes implanted with the Crystalens accommodative intraocular lens (IOL) at different accommodative demands. Prospective, observational study. Eleven cataract patients (22 eyes) who underwent implantation of a Crystalens accommodative IOL, and control groups of 9 normal subjects (17 eyes) and 17 pseudophakic patients (17 eyes) implanted with monofocal IOLs were evaluated. A custom-developed laser ray tracing aberrometer was used to measure the optical aberrations. The monochromatic wave aberrations were described using a sixth-order Zernike polynomial expansion. Measurements were obtained under dilated and natural viewing conditions (for accommodative efforts ranging from 0 to 2.5 diopters [D]). The accommodative response was obtained by analyzing changes in paraxial defocus (associated to changes in defocus) and by evaluating the differences in the effective defocus (associated with defocus, spherical aberrations, and pupil diameter) with the accommodative demand. Depth of focus was estimated from through-focus objective optical quality. Wave aberration measurements were highly reproducible. Vertical trefoil (Z3(-3)) was the predominant higher-order aberration in the Crystalens group and significantly higher (P < .0001) than in the young group, but similar to the monofocal IOL group. The coma root mean square also was higher (P < .005) in the Crystalens group than in the young group. On average, the defocus term (Z2(0)), astigmatism, or higher-order aberrations did not change systematically with accommodative demand in Crystalens eyes. As found for paraxial defocus, the effective defocus in Crystalens eyes did not show significant differences between conditions: 0.34 ± 0.48 D (far), 0.32 ± 0.50 D (intermediate), and 0.34 ± 0.44 D (near). Depth of focus was statistically significantly higher in the Crystalens eyes than in the control groups. The accommodative response of eyes implanted with the Crystalens accommodative IOLs, measured objectively using laser ray tracing aberrometry, was lower than 0.4 D in all eyes. Several subjects showed changes in astigmatism, spherical aberration, trefoil, and coma with accommodation, which must arise from geometrical and alignment changes in the lens with accommodative demand. Pseudoaccommodation from increased depth of focus may contribute to near vision functionality in Crystalens-implanted patients.