Presbyopia-correcting Intraocular Lenses Research Articles

Visual outcomes and patient satisfaction after implantations of three types of presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses that have undergone corneal refractive surgery

This prospective, non-randomized, comparative study aimed to compare the visual outcomes and patient satisfaction after implantations of three presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs) after myopic refractive surgery. It was conducted from January 2020 to December 2021 in Shanghai Heping Eye Hospital. Patients were divided into three groups based on the type of IOL implanted. The visual acuity, refractive stability, high-order aberrations, objective visual quality, spectacle independence, and visual function index 14 questionnaire scores of the three groups were compared. This study included 78 eyes of 39 patients: 26 eyes with 839MP, 26 eyes with MF30, and 26 eyes with ZXR00. Uncorrected distance visual acuity improved significantly for all three groups. For a pupil diameter of 4.0 mm, the spherical aberrations of the three groups were 0.33 ± 0.16 μ, 0.50 ± 0.08 μ, and 0.39 ± 0.10 μ, respectively. The spectacle independence for distance vision was over 90% in each group; for near vision, it was only 25% for the ZXR00 group. All three types of presbyopia-correcting IOLs improved visual quality in post-LASIK or PRK patients. However, the high incidence of photic phenomena after presbyopia-correcting IOL implantation in patients who have undergone myopic LASIK should not be neglected.

Characterizing glare effects associated with diffractive optics in presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses.

To objectively quantify glare of intraocular lenses (IOLs) utilizing a diffractive principle to extend visual range. To identify models with increased susceptibility to inducing glare. David J Apple Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany. Laboratory investigation. Glare was assessed by means of straylight parameter with a standard C-Quant (Oculus GmbH) intended for 7°. In addition, two C-Quant modifications were used to test lower angles (i.e., 2.5° and 3.5°). The following IOL models were assessed: PanOptix (Alcon Inc.) and AT Lisa Tri (Zeiss Meditec), Synergy (J&J Vision), and Triumf (BVI Medical), the latter two with chromatic-aberration correction at distance. Straylight from trifocals was compared against a monofocal W-60R lens (Santen). The C-Quant test was performed through the studied IOLs via additional optical components attached to its ocular. Straylight (deg2sr-1) of the control was <1 at all tested angles, with the trifocal models showing comparable straylight at 7°. At 3.5°, Triumf's straylight increased to 15.5 ±0.6, followed by Synergy (6.2 ±1.1), PanOptix (4.1 ±0.3), and AT Lisa Tri (2.0 ±0.8). The chromatic-aberration correcting models demonstrated correspondingly high straylight (Synergy: 18.8 ±1.3; Triumf: 17.3 ±0.5) at 2.5° compared to PanOptix (4.3 ±0.4), AT Lisa Tri (2.1 ±0.1) and monofocal IOLs yielding minimal or no increase. Trifocal IOLs induced increased straylight, but it was limited to lower angles, which may cause difficulties detecting these effects using a standard clinical approach. The latest IOL designs featuring chromatic aberration correction at far-focus appear more susceptible than the established trifocals to inducing glare phenomena.

Comparison of visual outcomes of bilateral dual-technology diffractive intraocular lens vs blended enhanced monofocal with dual-technology intraocular lens.

To compare clinical outcomes after implantation of TECNIS Synergy (ZFR00V) intraocular lenses (IOLs) in both eyes and implantation of the TECNIS Synergy and TECNIS Eyhance (ICB00) combination in patients undergoing cataract surgery. Department of Cataract, Hospital Oftalmológico de Brasilia (HOB), Brasília, Brazil. Prospective, interventional, randomized, parallel-group study. Patients were categorized into 2 groups: Group 1: ZFR00V IOL was implanted in both eyes. Group 2: An ICB00 IOL was implanted in the dominant eye, and a ZFR00V IOL was implanted in the nondominant eye. Visual acuity was similar between the 2 groups (95% CI <0.1 logMAR). A superior visual acuity of ≥ 20/25 (at -2.00 to -2.50 diopters [D]) was achieved in Group 1 (bilateral ZFR00V) than in Group 2 (combination of ZFR00V/ICB00). The binocular defocus curve demonstrated better visual acuity at 40 cm (-2.00 D) and 50 cm (-2.50 D) in Group 1 than in Group 2 ( P < .05). Similar contrast sensitivity values were observed between the 2 groups. Patients in Group 1 reported higher satisfaction (completely satisfied) than those in Group 2 ( P < .05). However, halos and glare were more pronounced in Group 1 than in Group 2 ( P < .05). Both presbyopia-correcting IOL combinations showed similar binocular visual acuity results. Group 1 demonstrated enhanced visual acuity in the defocus curve at 40 cm (-2.00 D) and 50 cm (-2.50 D). Comparable contrast sensitivity outcomes were observed in both groups. Patients were more completely satisfied in Group 1 than in Group 2, despite the higher frequency of postoperative nighttime halos and glare.

CLINICAL OUTCOMES OF A TORIC CONTINUOUS RANGE OF VISION PRESBYOPIA-CORRECTING INTRAOCULAR LENS.

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of the toric version of a presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL) based on the combination of a diffractive-based extended depth of focus (EDOF) pattern and a diffractive multifocal platform. Miranza COI Bilbao, Spain. Prospective case series. Thirty-five patients (51-84 years) with corneal astigmatism ranging from 0.75 to 2.19 D undergoing bilateral cataract surgery with implantation of the Synergy™ Toric II IOL (Johnson & Johnson Vision, Jacksonville, Florida, USA) were evaluated during a 3-month follow-up. Visual acuity, refraction, defocus curve, and patient-reported outcomes with the Catquest-9SF questionnaire were analyzed. A vectorial analysis was used to analyze the accuracy of astigmatic correction. Mean 3-month monocular postoperative uncorrected distance, intermediate (80 cm) and near (40 cm) visual acuities were 0.06±0.11, 0.13±0.12, and 0.13±0.09 logMAR, respectively. Mean monocular distance-corrected intermediate (80 cm) and near visual acuity (40 cm) were 0.11±0.12 and 0.10±0.10 logMAR, respectively. Mean binocular defocus curve showed visual acuities of 0.10 logMAR or better for defocus levels from +0.50 to -2.50 D. Residual cylinder was within ±0.50 D in 97.0% of eyes. The surgically induced astigmatism prediction error ranged between -0.49 and 0.50 D, with a mean value of 0.04±0.16 D. Mean absolute IOL rotation was 3.79±2.94º. Significant improvements were found in all Rasch calibrated scores obtained with Catquest-9SF (p<0.001). The implantation of the toric presbyopia correcting IOL evaluated provides an efficacious astigmatic correction while providing a fully restoration of the visual function across different distances.

A comparative study of two presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses combining bifocal and extended depth-of-focus profiles.

To compare the visual performance of two presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs) that combine both bifocal and extended depth-of-focus profiles, Artis® Symbiose® Plus (Symbiose Plus; Cristalens Industrie, Lannion, France) and Tecnis® Synergy® (Synergy; Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, USA). The medical records of patients with cataract bilaterally implanted with either Symbiose Plus or Synergy between January 2022 and January 2023 were assessed. The principal measures of postoperative findings included uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near (40 and 33cm) visual acuity (UNVA), objective optical quality (OOQ) parameters, distance-corrected defocus curve analysis, and surveys of subjective satisfaction. Total of 96 eyes from 48 patients were enrolled. Each group was equally composed of 24 patients, 48 eyes. There were no significant differences between the two groups on baseline characteristics. Both IOLs displayed excellent binocular UDVA, CDVA, and UNVA (40 and 33cm) with no statistical difference (p = 0.467(UDVA), p = 0.584(CDVA), p = 0.096(40-cm UNVA), and p = 0.621(33-cm UNVA)). However, with regard to UIVA, the Synergy group showed significantly superior results (p < 0.001). In contrast, the Symbiose Plus group showed significantly better results on OOQ parameters and patient-reported quality of vision survey outcomes (both p < 0.001). Both IOLs provided a decent continuous range of vision from near to far distance.

Comparative Analysis of the Clinical Outcomes of Two Toric Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses.

To evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes of two toric presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs). Non-randomized prospective comparative study including 86 eyes of 51 patients (age 43-83years) that underwent cataract surgery with implantation of one of the following two IOLs: TECNIS Toric Synergy (Johnson & Johnson Vision) (Synergy group) or AT LISA tri toric 939MP (Carl Zeiss Meditec) (ATLISA group). Visual and refractive outcomes were evaluated during a 6-month follow-up. At 6months after surgery, all eyes achieved uncorrected distance visual acuity 20/25 or better in both groups, whereas 96.2% and 100% of eyes achieved uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) 20/25 or better in the ATLISA and Synergy groups, respectively. All eyes achieved postoperative mesopic UNVA 20/30 or better in both IOL groups; 96.2% and 100% of eyes had a manifest cylinder ≤ 0.50 D at 6months in ATLISA and Synergy groups, respectively. Mean magnitude of error was 0.04 ± 0.20 and - 0.04 ± 0.09 D in ATLISA and Synergy groups, respectively (p = 0.05). In the defocus curve, significant differences were found between IOL groups for most of distance-corrected visual acuities, except those corresponding to defocus of 0 D (p = 0.268) and - 1 D (p = 0.361). The two toric presbyopia-correcting IOLs evaluated provide an efficacious astigmatic correction combined with a successful distance, intermediate and near visual rehabilitation. The visual performance seems to be better for most visual demands with the TECNIS Toric Synergy IOL, especially for distances closer than 40cm.

Vehicle Headlight Halo Simulation of Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses.

This optical bench study was designed to evaluate and compare the halos generated by presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (PCIOLs) and monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs), with or without lens decentration, using an optical bench to simulate the headlight of a distant vehicle in mesopic conditions. Halos generated by six nondiffractive and 10 diffractive IOLs with different dioptric add powers were evaluated using a high dynamic range bench system. Halo intensities were compared by assessing the area under the measured intensity profile curve to compute the relative halo magnitude (RHM). Nondiffractive PCIOLs produced smaller and less intense bench halo images than diffractive ones. RHM measurements ranged from 964 to 1896. Monofocal IOLs produced lower RHM values, whereas diffractive PCIOLs generated higher ones. When decentered by 0.5 mm with respect to the system aperture, more obviously asymmetric halo image profiles were observed in diffractive compared with nondiffractive PCIOLs. Simulated bench halos of nondiffractive PCIOLs are smaller and less intense than those of diffractive PCIOLs. Additional clinical studies assessing standardized patient-reported outcomes measures are required to correlate these bench results with patient satisfaction. This study contrasts the design-related simulated bench halos of nondiffractive and diffractive PCIOLs, aiming to elucidate their impact on halo perception.

Patient Perception and Self-Reported Outcomes with Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses (PCIOLs): A Social Media Listening Study.

Presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (PCIOL) implantation is a popular treatment option for cataract surgery patients who desire spectacle independence. This study aimed to understand patient perception and outcomes with PCIOLs by analyzing patient social media posts. This was a non-interventional retrospective study that used predefined search strings to identify publicly available social media data discussing patient perceptions and outcomes with seven PCIOLs (three trifocal, one multifocal with continuous range of vision, and three extended depth-of-focus [EDOF] PCIOLs). Relevant posts were searched from Reddit, YouTube, and Facebook and patient forums Patient.info, Medicine.net, Optiker-Forum, and Medizin Forum from September 2020 to October 2022 in four languages (English, German, French, and Spanish). A total of 2237 posts were included, all in English, with 68% of posts identified on Patient.info. The themes most discussed by patients were quality of vision (69% of total posts), patient experience after PCIOL implantation (30%), patient perception before PCIOL implantation (26%), and visual disturbances (24%). Most discussed PCIOLs were Vivity® (58% of total posts), PanOptix® (38%), Synergy® (26%), and Symfony® (13%). Patient perception of PCIOLs was most frequently influenced by healthcare professionals, online reading, and online videos (31%, 18%, and 15% of posts, respectively). A total of 215 posts (10% of total) discussed glasses use after PCIOL surgery: for EDOF and trifocal/multifocal PCIOLs, 37% and 56% of posts discussing glasses use stated being glasses free, respectively. A total of 537 posts discussed visual disturbances: halos/rings (66%) and starbursts (36%) were the most discussed visual disturbances for all lens types. Being glasses free after PCIOL implantation appeared to be a key driver of patient satisfaction. Social media provides a rich source of information on patient perception, experience, and overall satisfaction of PCIOLs that can be used to complement and guide the collection of further evidence generated through controlled trials.

Premium Intraocular Lenses in Glaucoma-A Systematic Review.

The incidence of both cataract and glaucoma is increasing globally. With increasing patient expectation and improved technology, premium intraocular lenses (IOLs), including presbyopia-correcting and toric IOLs, are being increasingly implanted today. However, concerns remain regarding the use of premium IOLs, particularly presbyopia-correcting IOLs, in eyes with glaucoma. This systematic review evaluates the use of premium IOLs in glaucoma. A comprehensive search of the MEDLINE database was performed from inception until 1 June 2023. Initial search yielded 1404 records, of which 12 were included in the final review of post-operative outcomes. Studies demonstrated high spectacle independence for distance and good patient satisfaction in glaucomatous eyes, with positive outcomes also in post-operative visual acuity, residual astigmatism, and contrast sensitivity. Considerations in patient selection include anatomical and functional factors, such as the type and severity of glaucomatous visual field defects, glaucoma subtype, presence of ocular surface disease, ocular changes after glaucoma surgery, and the reliability of disease monitoring, all of which may be affected by, or influence, the outcomes of premium IOL implantation in glaucoma patients. Regular reviews on this topic are needed in order to keep up with the rapid advancements in IOL technology and glaucoma surgical treatments.

The Novel Optical Design and Clinical Classification of a Wavefront-Shaping Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lens.

To evaluate the clinical rationale of wavefront-shaping technology, describe how intraocular lenses (IOLs) using wavefront-shaping technology are differentiated from refractive or diffractive optical presbyopia-correcting designs, and describe the mode of action of this technology. Extended depth of focus (EDoF) IOLs are the latest class of presbyopia-correcting IOLs addressing the growing demand of patients for reduced spectacle dependence. These use various optical technologies, including diffractive designs (eg, TECNIS Symfony ZXR00 and AT LARA 29 MP) and non-diffractive designs such as small aperture (eg, IC-8 IOL and XtraFocus Pinhole Implant), spherical aberration (eg, MINI WELL Ready and LuxSmart), and wavefront shaping (eg, AcrySof IQ Vivity DFT015 and Clareon Vivity CNWET0). Despite some improvement in visual acuity at intermediate and near distances, these technologies can still be associated with increased rate of visual disturbances or poorer distance vision compared with monofocal IOLs. One way to overcome such limitations is using a wavefront-shaping optical principle. Clinical data show that wavefront-shaping technology results in a continuous EDoF compared with a monofocal IOL while exhibiting a minimal halo, similar to an aspheric monofocal IOL. Clinically, this translates to a lens that has proven to exceed the American National Standards Institute/American Academy of Ophthalmology criteria for an EDoF IOL. The novel wavefront-shaping optic technology allows patients to achieve a continuous range of vision from distance to functional near with low levels of visual disturbances comparable with aspheric monofocal IOLs.

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 a new four-haptic hydrophobic presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens

A new presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL) combining bifocal and extended-depth-of-focus profiles (Symbiose: Artis Symbiose Plus; Cristalens Industrie, Lannion, France) was introduced. We compared the output with that of a standard monofocal IOL (PL E: Artis PL E). The two four-haptic hydrophobic IOLs were made of the same material from the same company. Cataract patients bilaterally implanted with either PL E or Symbiose between November 2021 and August 2022 were reviewed. The principal measures of the postoperative results were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA); corrected distance VA (CDVA); uncorrected intermediate VA; uncorrected near VA; objective optical quality; and distance-corrected defocus curves. This study included forty-eight patients (96 eyes), with 22 and 26 patients (44 and 52 eyes, respectively) being implanted with PL E and Symbiose, respectively. All patients received the same type of IOL implanted in both eyes. The average age of patients was 70.9 ± 7.1 and 60.0 ± 8.5 years in PL E and Symbiose groups, respectively, with significantly younger patients in Symbiose group (p < 0.001). Both IOLs displayed excellent UDVA and CDVA with no statistical difference (p = 0.081 (monocular UDVA), p = 0.599 (monocular CDVA), p = 0.204 (binocular UDVA), and p = 0.145 (binocular CDVA)). In comparison with PL E group, Symbiose group showed significantly superior postoperative intermediate and near VA (p < 0.001). PL E group showed significantly superior objective optical quality compared with Symbiose group (p < 0.001). Symbiose provides a continuous range of vision that ensures a seamless transition from far to near with no discontinuity. It also delivers a smooth defocus curve with a larger landing area than the PL E. But the objective optical quality was better in PL E.

Recommendation for Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: A Delphi Consensus Statement by the ESASO Study Group

To establish consensus among experts in lens and refractive surgery to guide general ophthalmologists on issues related to presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs). A modified Delphi method to reach a consensus among experts. A steering committee formulated 105 relevant items grouped into four sections (preoperative considerations, IOL selection, intraoperative considerations, and postoperative considerations). The consensus was defined as ≥ 70% of experts agreeing with the evaluation of a statement. Ten experts participated and completed all rounds of questionnaires (100% response rate). Of 68 items considered in the preoperative considerations, consensus was achieved in 48 (70.6%). There was a lack of consensus over IOL selection, the experts only agreed on the importance of the patient's habits for the optical IOL design selection. Of the 14 considerations related to intraoperative issues, the experts reached a consensus on 10 (71.4%). The postoperative considerations section reached the highest consensus in 10 items of 13 (76.9%). Key recommendations for a diffractive multifocal IOL were a potential postoperative visual acuity > 0.5, a keratometry between 40-45 diopters, a pupil >2.8mm under photopic conditions and <6.0 mm under scotopic conditions, a root mean square of higher order corneal aberrations <0.5 µm for 6-mm pupil size, while monofocal or non-diffractive IOLs should be considered for patients with coexisting eye disorders. A lack of agreement was found in the issues related to the IOL selection.

Comparison of Five Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: Optical-Bench Assessment with Visual-Quality Simulation.

Presbyopia correction through implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) is a modality offered to both cataract and refractive-lens exchange patients. To maximize postoperative satisfaction, IOL selection needs to be made based on patients' requirements aligned with the available technology. Five Trifocal IOLs were assessed in this study, and their differentiating features were identified: Triumf POD L GF, AT Lisa Tri, Tecnis Synergy, AcrySof IQ PanOptix, and Acriva Trinova Pro C. The optical quality was assessed using the modulation-transfer-function principle. Simulated defocus curves were derived from a non-linear formula. Far-focus simulated visual acuity (simVA) was 0.03 logMAR or better for all the studied IOLs, showing minimal differences. However, each IOL's intermediate focus position differed across a range from 61 cm to 80 cm; and for the near focus, it was 36 cm to 44 cm. Triumf demonstrated improved intermediate point at the expense of the near focus resulting in a lower predicted near VA. PanOptix exhibited the shortest range of vision without a clear distinction between intermediate and near-point. The remaining lenses presented three foci of comparable optical quality and, thus, simVA performance. Each model, however, revealed a different aperture-change response. Trinova function improved at intermediate but was worse at near for larger pupils. The opposite was observed for AT Lisa. Synergy's optical quality change was predominantly associated with lower pupil diameter. In conclusion, the trifocal IOLs can be differentiated according to their secondary-foci position, light-energy distribution, and pupil-size-related behavior. The observed differences may translate directly into a clinical effect showing that the trifocal IOLs vary in their ability to deliver optimal vision at different distances, with some providing improved intermediate while others favor reading distance. The knowledge gained through this objective testing can support IOL selection, postoperative patient counselling and increase the chance of spectacle independence after surgery.

Spectral Effects and Range of Focus in a Multizonal-Refractive Intraocular Lens Compared with a Standard Trifocal Diffractive Design.

This study was performed to compare the optical performance of a multizonal presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL) and a conventional trifocal model. The optical quality and simulated visual acuity (VA) of 570 Precizon Presbyopic NVA (OPHTEC BV) and AcrySof IQ PanOptix (Alcon) were compared. The Precizon features a refractive design consisting of alternating optical zones that converge the incident light into two principal foci and a transitional zone for intermediate vision. By contrast, the PanOptix applies a diffractive (non-apodized) profile to achieve trifocality. Simulated VA was derived from the modulation transfer function. Chromatic aberration effects were also studied. The diffractive and multizonal-refractive lenses yielded comparable simulated VAs at far focus (0.00 logMAR). All curves showed a reduction in expected VA with an increase in negative defocus. At -1.0 D, the multizonal-refractive IOL's VA dropped by 0.05 logMAR, but for the diffractive model, it was one line (0.11 logMAR). The multizonal-refractive lens's VA prediction at the secondary peak was 0.03 logMAR-minimally better than the 0.06 logMAR of the diffractive lens at -2.5 D. The refractive lens exhibited a 24% decrease in polychromatic optical quality due to material dispersion. The performance of PanOptix was more substantially affected, showing a 44% loss at 50 lp/mm at far, with minimal effects at other distances. The multizonal-refractive lens does not fall short of the established trifocal IOL, and it can be used to extend the visual range of pseudophakic patients. Although the multizonal-refractive lens has lower material dispersion, the diffractive model corrects chromatism beyond far focus.

Rate of Complete Spectacle Independence with a Trifocal Intraocular Lens: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was conducted to identify and obtain a precise single summary estimate on complete spectacle independence after bilateral implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) (AcrySof PanOptix, TFNTXX/TFATXX) for patients undergoing cataract surgery. A search was conducted in PubMed from January 2017 to September 2021. Relevant congress presentations were also searched to include data from completed studies not yet published. Search terms included the intervention (TFNTXX, TFATXX, PanOptix) and outcomes of interest (patient-reported spectacle independence rates). A Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis was conducted, providing a pooled estimate (median and its 95% credible interval) of complete spectacle independence rates among cataract surgery patients. Subgroup analyses evaluated spectacle independence after cataract surgery across different working distances (near, intermediate, far). Nineteen unique clinical studies were identified. Based on a meta-analysis of 13 studies (N = 513 patients), the complete spectacle independence rate after cataract surgery with TFNTXX/TFATXX IOL was 91.6% (95% credible interval 86.8-95.9%). Additionally, the spectacle independence rates at each focal point (N = 13 studies, 603 patients) were 89.6% (near), 96.3% (intermediate), and 95.9% (far). This meta-analysis demonstrated that at least nine out of ten patients receiving TFNTXX/TFATXX trifocal IOL during cataract surgery can expect to achieve complete spectacle independence. This study provides informative data for clinicians and patients to feel confident in the use of trifocal intraocular lenses as presbyopia-correcting IOLs that offer high rates of complete spectacle independence.

Clinical outcomes of presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses in patients with Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy

Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) is considered a contraindication for the implantation of presbyopia-correcting IOLs, without sufficient corroborating evidence. A Retrospective, case–control study. Nineteen eyes of ten patients with grade 2–5 FECD (study group) and 57 healthy eyes of 57 patients (control group) who underwent cataract surgery with implantation of presbyopia-correcting IOLs, at the Ein-Tal Eye Center, Tel Aviv, Israel, were included. The target refraction was emmetropia for both groups. Two subgroups of IOLs were analyzed separately: extended depth of focus (EDOF), (9 eyes of FECD patients and 27 eyes of control patients) and multifocal IOLs (10 eyes of FECD patients and 30 eyes of control patients). Main outcome measures were visual acuity and refraction 6 weeks after the surgery. Secondary outcomes were patient perceptions of visual acuity, spectacle independence, photic phenomena and satisfaction scores, reported in a self-assessment questionnaire. FECD patients in the EDOF IOL subgroup had inferior uncorrected distance visual acuity (P = 0.007) and better uncorrected near visual acuity (P = 0.001) compared to the controls. They had less spectacle independence for the intermediate range (P = 0.01) and overall (P = 0.006). However, they did not have more photic phenomena. In the multifocal IOL subgroup, no significant differences were found between the FECD and the control group in visual acuity for all ranges and in spectacle independence. FECD patients had more photic phenomena than the controls (P = 0.006), but it did not interfere with daily life activities. There was no difference in post-operative mean spherical equivalent, patient reported visual perception, and general satisfaction between FECD and control patients in both groups. Our results suggest that presbyopia-correcting IOLs can be carefully considered in patients with grade 2–5 FECD, with slightly inferior results compared with healthy eyes.

Clinical Outcomes After Bilateral Implantation of a Diffractive Trifocal Intraocular Lens: A Worldwide Pooled Analysis of Prospective Clinical Investigations.

To investigate visual and safety outcomes of AcrySof® IQ PanOptix® (model TFNT00), a trifocal, presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL), in patients of different ethnicities across multiple countries, based on a pooled analysis of six prospective multicenter studies. This pooled analysis included adult patients from six prospective clinical studies performed across 56 centers worldwide. After cataract removal by phacoemulsification, all patients were implanted with TFNT00; follow-up duration varied from 3 to 12 months according to the studies' design. Binocular defocus curve; absolute manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE); and binocular photopic uncorrected and corrected visual acuities at distance (UCDVA, BCDVA; 4-5 m), intermediate (UCIVA, DCIVA; 60-66 cm), and near (UCNVA, DCNVA; 40 cm) were measured. The study included 557 patients, 547 of whom were implanted bilaterally with the TFNT00 IOL (n = 1094 eyes). Binocular visual data at 1 month and 3-6 months after implantation were available for up to 546 and 542 bilaterally implanted patients, respectively. A continuous range of 0.1logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) or better vision from distance (0.00 diopter [D], 4-5 m) to near (-3.00D; optically equivalent to 33 cm) was observed 3-6 months after TFNT00 implantation. At 3-6 months, 88.2% of first eyes achieved an MRSE ≤0.50 D and 88.7% of second eyes achieved an MRSE ≤0.50 D. Overall, 99.3%, 92.3%, and 94.6% of patients bilaterally implanted with TFNT00 achieved binocular photopic BCDVA, DCIVA, and DCNVA of 0.14 logMAR or better, respectively. Ocular adverse device effects and secondary surgical interventions (SSIs) were infrequent. This global pooled analysis showed that TFNT00 provided a continuous range of 0.1 logMAR (~20/25 Snellen) or better vision from distance to 33 cm, with a low incidence of ocular adverse device effects and SSIs.

Implantation of diffractive extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses in normal tension glaucoma eyes: A case series

PurposeImplantation of presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs) has not been advised for glaucomatous eyes because of the risk of decreased contrast sensitivity with progress of glaucoma. Extended depth-of-focus (EDF) IOLs have been reported to provide comparable postoperative visual function and influence on the visual field to monofocal IOLs. MethodsThis case series was a retrospective medical record review of 16 eyes of 10 patients who had normal tension glaucoma (NTG) with no central visual field defects and underwent cataract surgery with implantation of diffractive EDF IOLs. At 3 months postoperatively, distance-corrected visual acuities (DCVAs) at distances of 5, 1, and 0.5 m and photopic contrast sensitivity were examined. Automated perimetry using the 30-2 Swedish interactive threshold algorithm was also performed, and the mean variance (MD) values, mean deviation values at the central four points (central MD), and foveal threshold were recorded. ResultsThe mean age of the patients (5 men, 5 women) was 66.5 years. Over 80% of eyes obtained DCVAs of 20/20, 20/20, and 20/25 at 5 m, 1 m, and 0.5 m, respectively. Whereas 5 of 16 eyes were categorized as severe by the Hodapp-Parrish-Anderson classification, postoperative contrast sensitivity was within the normal range, except for 4 eyes at 18 cycles per degree. Conclusions and importanceIn this case series, the postoperative visual functions of NTG patients with EDF IOLs were almost comparable to those of normal eyes with the same IOLs, which demonstrated that the use of EDF IOLs for controlled NTG eyes would be permissible. While careful patient selection and follow-up for NTG progress are important, further investigations are necessary for confirming the safety and exploring the selection criteria.

Visualization of Ray Propagation through Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lenses.

Extended depth-of-focus (EDoF) presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL) models differ in their optical design and performance. In the laboratory, we compared the ray propagation and light intensity profiles of four IOLs: the non-diffractive AcrySof IQ Vivity (Alcon Inc., Fort Worth, TX, USA) and two diffractive models, Symfony ZXR00 (Johnson & Johnson Vision, Jacksonville, FL, USA) and AT Lara 829 MP (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Berlin, Germany). A fourth lens, the monofocal AcrySof IQ SN60WF (Alcon Inc.) acted as the control. We projected a 520 nm laser light through each submerged lens in a bath of fluorescein solution. A camera mounted on a microscope captured the light that emerged from the IOL. We recorded the IOLs' point spread function (PSF) to determine the presence of unwanted visual effects. The ray propagation visualization and light intensity profile of the monofocal control showed one distinct focus, while the AcrySof IQ Vivity demonstrated an extended focus area. We observed two distinct foci with each diffractive IOL. We found a lower level of light spread beyond the PSF center for the AcrySof IQ Vivity compared to the diffractive IOLs. In conclusion, we could confirm the extended range of focus for all the EDoF IOL models. However, the non-diffractive AcrySof IQ Vivity appears to have a smoother transition from a far to an intermediate range. We discuss whether, in clinical use, the higher level of spurious light we found in the diffractive designs may translate into increased dysphotopsia.