Positional accommodative intraocular lens power error induced by the estimation of the corneal power and the effective lens position

Purpose: To evaluate the predictability of the refractive correction achieved with a positional accommodating intraocular lenses (IOL) and to develop a potential optimization of it by minimizing the error associated with the keratometric estimation of the corneal power and by developing a predictive formula for the effective lens position (ELP). Materials and Methods: Clinical data from 25 eyes of 14 patients (age range, 52–77 years) and undergoing cataract surgery with implantation of the accommodating IOL Crystalens HD (Bausch and Lomb) were retrospectively reviewed. In all cases, the calculation of an adjusted IOL power (PIOLadj) based on Gaussian optics considering the residual refractive error was done using a variable keratometric index value (nkadj) for corneal power estimation with and without using an estimation algorithm for ELP obtained by multiple regression analysis (ELPadj). PIOLadj was compared to the real IOL power implanted (PIOLReal, calculated with the SRK-T formula) and also to the values estimated by the Haigis, HofferQ, and Holladay I formulas. Results: No statistically significant differences were found between PIOLReal and PIOLadj when ELPadj was used (P = 0.10), with a range of agreement between calculations of 1.23 D. In contrast, PIOLReal was significantly higher when compared to PIOLadj without using ELPadj and also compared to the values estimated by the other formulas. Conclusions: Predictable refractive outcomes can be obtained with the accommodating IOL Crystalens HD using a variable keratometric index for corneal power estimation and by estimating ELP with an algorithm dependent on anatomical factors and age.

Implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens: One-year follow-up

Purpose: To evaluate the visual, refractive, contrast-sensitivity, and aberrometric outcomes during a 1-year follow-up after implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL). Setting: Premium Clinic, Teplice, Czech Republic. Design: Prospective case series. Methods: This study included eyes of patients having cataract surgery with implantation of the trifocal IOL model AT Lisa tri 839MP. Distance, intermediate (66 and 80 cm), and near (33 and 40 cm) vision; contrast sensitivity; aberrometric outcomes; and the defocus curve were evaluated during a 12-month follow-up. The level of posterior capsule opacification (PCO) was also evaluated. Results: In 120 eyes (60 patients), 1 month postoperatively, an improvement was observed in all visual parameters (P ≤ .03) except corrected near and intermediate visual acuities (both P ≥ .05). From 1 month to 12 months postoperatively, small but statistically significant changes were observed in uncorrected and corrected distance and near visual acuities (all P ≤ .03) and in uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (P = .01). In the defocus curve, no significant differences were found between visual acuities corresponding to defocus levels of −1.0 diopter (D) and −2.0 D (P = .22). The level of ocular spherical aberration decreased statistically significantly at 6 months (P < .001). Ocular and internal higher-order aberrations increased minimally but significantly from 6 to 12 months postoperatively (P < .001). The mean 12-month PCO score was 0.32 ± 0.44 (SD). Four eyes (3.3%) required neodymium:YAG capsulotomy. Conclusion: The trifocal IOL provided complete and stable visual restoration after cataract surgery during a 12-month follow-up, with good levels of visual quality.

La plus que lente; valse pour piano.

Mode of access: Internet.

Presas e escravatura : memoria apresentada no concurso para lente de 8a. [i.e. oitava] cadeira do curso da Escola Naval /

In portfolio.

Accommodating intraocular lenses:a review of design concepts, usage and assessment methods

The correction of presbyopia and restoration of true accommodative function to the ageing eye is the focus of much ongoing research and clinical work. A range of accommodating intraocular lenses (AIOLs) implanted during cataract surgery has been developed and they are designed to change either their position or shape in response to ciliary muscle contraction to generate an increase in dioptric power. Two main design concepts exist. First, axial shift concepts rely on anterior axial movement of one or two optics creating accommodative ability. Second, curvature change designs are designed to provide significant amplitudes of accommodation with little physical displacement. Single-optic devices have been used most widely, although the true accommodative ability provided by forward shift of the optic appears limited and recent findings indicate that alternative factors such as flexing of the optic to alter ocular aberrations may be responsible for the enhanced near vision reported in published studies. Techniques for analysing the performance of AIOLs have not been standardised and clinical studies have reported findings using a wide range of both subjective and objective methods, making it difficult to gauge the success of these implants. There is a need for longitudinal studies using objective methods to assess long-term performance of AIOLs and to determine if true accommodation is restored by the designs available. While dual-optic and curvature change IOLs are designed to provide greater amplitudes of accommodation than is possible with single-optic devices, several of these implants are in the early stages of development and require significant further work before human use is possible. A number of challenges remain and must be addressed before the ultimate goal of restoring youthful levels of accommodation to the presbyopic eye can be achieved.

Objective analysis of toric intraocular lens rotation and centration

PURPOSE: To assess the repeatability of an objective image analysis technique to determine intraocular lens (IOL) rotation and centration. SETTING: Six ophthalmology clinics across Europe. METHODS: One-hundred seven patients implanted with Akreos AO aspheric IOLs with orientation marks were imaged. Image quality was rated by a masked observer. The axis of rotation was determined from a line bisecting the IOL orientation marks. This was normalized for rotation of the eye between visits using the axis bisecting 2 consistent conjunctival vessels or iris features. The center of ovals overlaid to circumscribe the IOL optic edge and the pupil or limbus were compared to determine IOL centration. Intrasession repeatability was assessed in 40 eyes and the variability of repeated analysis examined. RESULTS: Intrasession rotational stability of the IOL was ±0.79 degrees (SD) and centration was ±0.10 mm horizontally and ±0.10 mm vertically. Repeated analysis variability of the same image was ±0.70 degrees for rotation and ±0.20 mm horizontally and ±0.31 mm vertically for centration. Eye rotation (absolute) between visits was 2.23 ± 1.84 degrees (10%>5 degrees rotation) using one set of consistent conjunctival vessels or iris features and 2.03 ± 1.66 degrees (7%>5 degrees rotation) using the average of 2 sets (P =.13). Poorer image quality resulted in larger apparent absolute IOL rotation (r =-0.45,P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Objective analysis of digital retroillumination images allows sensitive assessment of IOL rotation and centration stability. Eye rotation between images can lead to significant errors if not taken into account. Image quality is important to analysis accuracy.

Multifocal intraocular lens differentiation using defocus curves

Purpose: To determine the most appropriate analysis technique for the differentiation of multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) designs using defocus curve assessment of visual capability.Methods:Four groups of fifteen subjects were implanted bilaterally with either monofocal intraocular lenses, refractive MIOLs, diffractive MIOLs, or a combination of refractive and diffractive MIOLs. Defocus curves between -5.0D and +1.5D were evaluated using an absolute and relative depth-of-focus method, the direct comparison method and a new 'Area-of-focus' metric. The results were correlated with a subjective perception of near and intermediate vision. Results:Neither depth-of-focus method of analysis were sensitive enough to differentiate between MIOL groups (p>0.05). The direct comparison method indicated that the refractive MIOL group performed better at +1.00, -1.00 and -1.50 D and worse at -3.00, -3.50, -4.00 and -5.00D compared to the diffractive MIOL group (p

Development of a near activity visual questionnaire to assess accommodating intraocular lenses

Purpose: To develop a questionnaire that subjectively assesses near visual function in patients with 'accommodating' intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: A literature search of existing vision-related quality-of-life instruments identified all questions relating to near visual tasks. Questions were combined if repeated in multiple instruments. Further relevant questions were added and item interpretation confirmed through multidisciplinary consultation and focus groups. A preliminary 19-item questionnaire was presented to 22 subjects at their 4-week visit post first eye phacoemulsification with 'accommodative' IOL implantation, and again 6 and 12 weeks post-operatively. Rasch Analysis, Frequency of Endorsement, and tests of normality (skew and kurtosis) were used to reduce the instrument. Cronbach's alpha and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC) were determined for the final questionnaire. Construct validity was obtained by Pearson's product moment correlation (PPMC) of questionnaire scores to reading acuity (RA) and to Critical Print Size (CPS) reading speed. Criterion validity was obtained by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and dimensionality of the questionnaire was assessed by factor analysis. Results: Rasch Analysis eliminated nine items due to poor fit statistics. The final items have good separation (2.55), internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.97) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.66). PPMC of questionnaire scores with RA was 0.33, and with CPS reading speed was 0.08. Area under the ROC curve was 0.88 and Factor Analysis revealed one principal factor. Conclusion: The pilot data indicates the questionnaire to be internally consistent, reliable and a valid instrument that could be useful for assessing near visual function in patients with 'accommodating' IOLS. The questionnaire will now be expanded to include other types of presbyopic correction. © 2007 British Contact Lens Association.

Theoretical evaluation of the cataract extraction-refraction-implantation techniques for intraocular lens power calculation

PURPOSE: To evaluate theoretically three previously published formulae that use intra-operative aphakic refractive error to calculate intraocular lens (IOL) power, not necessitating pre-operative biometry. The formulae are as follows: IOL power (D) = Aphakic refraction x 2.01 [Ianchulev et al., J. Cataract Refract. Surg.31 (2005) 1530]; IOL power (D) = Aphakic refraction x 1.75 [Mackool et al., J. Cataract Refract. Surg.32 (2006) 435]; IOL power (D) = 0.07x(2) + 1.27x + 1.22, where x = aphakic refraction [Leccisotti, Graefes Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol.246 (2008) 729]. METHODS: Gaussian first order calculations were used to determine the relationship between intra-operative aphakic refractive error and the IOL power required for emmetropia in a series of schematic eyes incorporating varying corneal powers, pre-operative crystalline lens powers, axial lengths and post-operative IOL positions. The three previously published formulae, based on empirical data, were then compared in terms of IOL power errors that arose in the same schematic eye variants. RESULTS: An inverse relationship exists between theoretical ratio and axial length. Corneal power and initial lens power have little effect on calculated ratios, whilst final IOL position has a significant impact. None of the three empirically derived formulae are universally accurate but each is able to predict IOL power precisely in certain theoretical scenarios. The formulae derived by Ianchulev et al. and Leccisotti are most accurate for posterior IOL positions, whereas the Mackool et al. formula is most reliable when the IOL is located more anteriorly. CONCLUSION: Final IOL position was found to be the chief determinant of IOL power errors. Although the A-constants of IOLs are known and may be accurate, a variety of factors can still influence the final IOL position and lead to undesirable refractive errors. Optimum results using these novel formulae would be achieved in myopic eyes.

Mechanism of action of the tetraflex accommodative intraocular lens

PURPOSE:To investigate the mechanism of action of the Tetraflex (Lenstec Kellen KH-3500) accommodative intraocular lens (IOL). METHODS:Thirteen eyes of eight patients implanted with the Tetraflex accommodating IOL for at least 2 years underwent assessment of their objective amplitude-of-accommodation by autorefraction, anterior chamber depth and pupil size with optical coherence tomography, and IOL flexure with aberrometry, each viewing a target at 0.0 to 4.00 diopters of accommodative demand. RESULTS:Pupil size decreased by 0.62+/-0.41 mm on increasing accommodative demand, but the Tetraflex IOL was relatively fixed in position within the eye. The ocular aberrations of the eye changed with increased accommodative demand, but not in a consistent manner among individuals. Those aberrations that appeared to be most affected were defocus, vertical primary and secondary astigmatism, vertical coma, horizontal and vertical primary and secondary trefoil, and spherical aberration. CONCLUSIONS:Some of the reported near vision benefits of the Tetraflex accommodating IOL appear to be due to changes in the optical aberrations because of the flexure of the IOL on accommodative effort rather than forward movement within the capsular bag.

Intraocular lenses in the 21st century

Editorial