Single-optic positional accommodating intraocular lenses: a review

Presbyopia is an age-related physiological condition that causes a gradual loss in the ability to focus on near objects, secondary to changes in zonular fibers, ciliary muscle and crystalline lens. Different surgical approaches are being pursued to surgically compensate presbyopia, such as corneal techniques or implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs); however, their inability to restore accommodation has led to the development of single-optic positional accommodative IOLs. The axial shift, with the contraction of the ciliary muscle, of these IOLs increases the refractive power of the eye, improving the level of uncorrected near vision. Single-optic positional accommodative IOLs present few disturbances and larger ocular aberrations that improve near vision. However, reduced amplitudes of accommodation are obtained, little IOL shifts are measured and overall visual outcomes are limited.

Comparative analysis of the visual performance and aberrometric outcomes with a new hybrid and two silicone hydrogel multifocal contact lenses: a pilot study

Background: The aim was to evaluate the visual performance achieved with a new multifocal hybrid contact lens and to compare it with that obtained with two other currently available multifocal soft contact lenses. Methods: This pilot prospective comparative study comprised a total of 16 presbyopic eyes of eight patients ranging in age from 43 to 58 years. All patients were fitted with three different models of multifocal contact lens: Duette multifocal (SynergEyes), Air Optix AQUA multifocal (Alcon) and Biofinity multifocal (CooperVision). Fittings were performed randomly in each patient according to a random number sequence, with a wash-out period between fittings of seven days. At two weeks post-fitting, visual, photopic contrast sensitivity and ocular aberrometry were evaluated. Results: No statistically significant differences were found in distance and near visual acuity achieved with the three different types of multifocal contact lens (p ≥ 0.05). Likewise, no significant differences between lenses were found in the monocular and binocular defocus curve (p ≥ 0.10). Concerning contrast sensitivity, better monocular contrast sensitivities for 6, 12 and 18 cycles per degree were found with the Duette and Air Optix multifocal compared to Biofinity (p = 0.02). Binocularly, differences between lenses were not significant (p ≥ 0.27). Furthermore, trefoil aberration was significantly higher with Biofinity multifocal (p < 0.01) and Air Optix (p = 0.01) multifocal compared to Duette. Conclusions: The Duette multifocal hybrid contact lens seems to provide similar visual quality outcomes in presbyopic patients with low corneal astigmatism, when compared with other soft multifocal contact lenses. This preliminary result should be confirmed in studies with larger samples.