Stability of a Novel Intraocular Lens Design: Comparison of Two Trifocal Lenses

PURPOSE: To compare visual outcomes, rotational stability, and centration in a randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing cataract surgery who were bilaterally implanted with two different trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with a similar optical zone but different haptic shape. METHODS: Twenty-one patients (42 eyes) with cataract and less than 1.50 D of corneal astigmatism underwent implantation of one FineVision/MicoF IOL in one eye and one POD FineVision IOL in the contralateral eye (PhysIOL, Liège, Belgium) at IOA Madrid Innova Ocular, Madrid, Spain. IOL allocation was random. Outcome measures, all evaluated 3 months postoperatively, included monocular and binocular uncorrected distance (UDVA), corrected distance (CDVA), distance-corrected intermediate (DCIVA), and near (DCNVA) visual acuity (at 80, 40, and 25 cm) under photopic conditions, refraction, IOL centration, haptic rotation, dysphotopsia, objective quality of vision and aberration quantification, patient satisfaction, and spectacle independence. RESULTS: Three months postoperatively, mean monocular UDVA, CDVA, DCIVA, and DCNVA (40 cm) under photopic conditions were 0.04 ± 0.07, 0.01 ± 0.04, 0.15 ± 0.11, and 0.16 ± 0.08 logMAR for the eyes implanted with the POD FineVision IOL and 0.03 ± 0.05, 0.01 ± 0.02, 0.17 ± 0.12, and 0.14 ± 0.08 logMAR for those receiving the FineVision/MicroF IOL. Moreover, the POD FineVision IOL showed similar centration (P > .05) and better rotational stability (P < .05) than the FineVision/MicroF IOL. Regarding halos, there was a minimal but statistically significant difference, obtaining better results with FineVision/MicroF. Full spectacle independence was reported by all patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed similar visual outcomes for both trifocal IOLs under test (POD FineVision and FineVision/MicroF). However, the POD FineVision IOL showed better rotational stability, as afforded by its design.

Clinical and quality of life data correlation with a single-optic accommodating intraocular lens

Purpose: To examine a single-optic accommodating intraocular lens (IOL) visual performance by correlating IOL implanted eyes’ defocus curve with the intraocular aberrometric profile and the impact on the quality of life (QOL). Methods: Prospective consecutive case series study including a total of 25 eyes of 14 patients with ages ranging between 52 and 79 years old. All cases underwent cataract surgery with implantation of the single-optic accommodating IOL Crystalens HD (Bausch & Lomb). Distance and near visual acuity outcomes, intraocular aberrations, the defocus curve and QOL (NEI VFQ-25) were evaluated 3 months after surgery. Results: A significant improvement in distance visual acuity was found postoperatively (p = 0.02). Mean postoperative LogMAR uncorrected near visual acuity was 0.44 ± 0.23 (20/30). 60% of eyes had a postoperative addition between 0 and 1.5 diopters (D). The defocus curve showed an area of maximum visual acuity for the levels of defocus corresponding to distance and intermediate vision (−1 to +0.5 D). Postoperative intermediate visual acuity correlated significantly some QOL indices (r ≥ 0.51, p ≤ 0.03; difficulty in going down steps or seeing how people react to things that patient says) as well as with J0 component of manifest cylinder. Postoperative distance-corrected near visual acuity correlated significantly with age (r = 0.65, p < 0.01). Conclusions: This accommodating IOL seems to be able to restore the distance visual function as well as to provide an improvement in intermediate and near vision with a significant impact on patient's QOL, although limited by age and astigmatism. Future studies with larger sample sizes should confirm all these trends.

Visual and optical performance and quality of life after implantation of posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens

Purpose To evaluate visual, optical, and quality of life (QoL) outcomes and intercorrelations after bilateral implantation of posterior chamber phakic intraocular lenses. Methods Twenty eyes with high to moderate myopia of 10 patients that underwent PRL implantation (Phakic Refractive Lens, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) were examined. Refraction, visual acuity, photopic and low mesopic contrast sensitivity (CS) with and without glare, ocular aberrations, as well as QoL outcomes (National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument-42, NEI RQL-42) were evaluated at 12 months postoperatively. Results Significant improvement in uncorrected (UDVA) and best-corrected distance (CDVA) visual acuities were found postoperatively (p < 0.01), with significant reduction in spherical equivalent (p < 0.01). Low mesopic CS without glare was significantly better than measurements with glare for 1.5, 3, and 6 cycles/degree (p < 0.01). No significant correlations between higher order root mean square (RMS) with CDVA (r = −0.26, p = 0.27) and CS (r ≤ 0.45, p ≥ 0.05) were found. Postoperative binocular photopic CS for 12 cycles/degree and 18 cycles/degree correlated significantly with several RQL-42 scales. Glare index correlated significantly with CS measures and scotopic pupil size (r = −0.551, p = 0.04), but not with higher order RMS (r = −0.02, p = 0.94). Postoperative higher order RMS, postoperative primary coma and postoperative spherical aberration was significant higher for 5-mm pupil diameter (p < 0.01) compared with controls. Conclusions Correction of moderate to high myopia by means of PRL implantation had a positive impact on CS and QoL. The aberrometric increase induced by the surgery does not seem to limit CS and QoL. However, perception of glare is still a relevant disturbance in some cases possibly related to the limitation of the optical zone of the PRL.

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.

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.

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.

Clinical evaluation of the Softec HD aberration-free aspheric intraocular lens

Purpose: To compare distance and near visual performance with a zero-aberration aspheric intraocular lens (IOL) (Softec HD, Lenstec, Inc. FL, USA) with that of an otherwise identical, but spherical IOL (Softec 1). Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, Solihull Hospital, West Midlands, United Kingdom. Methods: This prospective study comprised 37 patients with a Softec 1 spherical IOL implanted in one eye, who underwent phacoemulsification and received the Softec HD aspheric IOL in the fellow eye. One month post-operatively, unaided distance and near vision, residual refraction, best spectacle corrected distance and near visual acuity, reading speed, pseudoaccommodation and photopic contrast sensitivity were recorded. Wavefront analysis enabled comparison of higher order aberrations between the IOLs. Results: Prior to surgery, the Softec 1 and Softec HD eyes were not significantly different. Post-operatively, unaided vision, best spectacle corrected visual acuity and residual refraction were not significantly different between the eyes, nor were there significant differences observed between the measured wavefront aberrations. Once implanted, the range of focus was significantly better in the Softec HD IOL eye than the Softec 1 IOL eye and, although reading speed was equivalent to the Softec 1 eye, the print size at which this could be achieved was significantly smaller. Conclusions: Depth of field was significantly improved with the aspheric IOL compared with the spherical IOL, without any compromise in distance visual performance between the two IOLs.

Visual comparison of multifocal contact lens to monovision

Purpose. To compare visual function with the Bausch & Lomb PureVision multifocal contact lens to monovision with PureVision single vision contact lenses. Methods. Twenty presbyopic subjects were fitted with either the PureVision multifocal contact lens or monovision with PureVision singlevision lenses. Aftera 1-month trial, the following assessments of visual function were made: (a) distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity (VA); (b) reading ability; (c) distance and near contrast sensitivity function (CSF); (d) near range of clear vision; (e) stereoacuity; and (f) subjective evaluation of near vision ability with a standardized questionnaire. Subjects were then refitted with the alternative correction and the procedure was repeated. All measurements were compared between the two corrections, whereas the ``low addition'' multifocal lens was also compared with the ``high addition'' alternative. Results. Distance and near VA were significantly better with monovision than with the multifocal option (p < 0.05). Intermediate VA (p = 0.13) was similar with both corrections, whereas there was also no significant difference in distance and near CSF (p = 0.29 on both occasions). Reading speeds (p = 0.48) and the critical print size (p = 0.90) were not significantly different between the two contact lens corrections, but stereoacuity (p < 0.01) and the near range of clear vision (p < 0.05) were significantly better with the multifocal option than with monovision. Subjective assessment of near ability was similar for both types of contact lens (p = 0.52). The high addition multifocal lens produced significantly poorer distance and near CSF, near VA, and critical print size compared with the low addition alternative. Conclusions. Monovision performed better than a center-near aspheric simultaneous vision multifocal contact lens of the same material for distance and near VA only. The multifocal option provides better stereoacuity and near range of clear vision, with little differences in CSF, so a better balance of real-world visual function may be achieved due to minimal binocular disruption. (Optom Vis Sci 2009;86:98-105)

Rotational and centration stability of an aspheric intraocular lens with a simulated toric design

Purpose: To assess the stability of the Akreos AO intraocular lens (IOL) platform with a simulated toric design using objective image analysis. Setting: Six hospital eye clinics across Europe. Methods: After implantation in 1 eye of patients, IOLs with orientation marks were imaged at 1 to 2 days, 7 to 14 days, 30 to 60 days, and 120 to 180 days. The axis of rotation and IOL centration were objectively assessed using validated image analysis. Results: The study enrolled 107 patients with a mean age of 69.9 years ± 7.7 (SD). The image quality was sufficient for IOL rotation analysis in 91% of eyes. The mean rotation between the first day postoperatively and 120 to 180 days was 1.93 ± 2.33 degrees, with 96% of IOLs rotating fewer than 5 degrees and 99% rotating fewer than 10 degrees. There was no significant rotation between visits and no clear bias in the direction of rotation. In 71% of eyes, the dilation and image quality was sufficient for image analysis of centration. The mean change in centration between 1 day and 120 to 180 days was 0.21 ± 0.11 mm, with all IOLs decentering less than 0.5 mm. There was no significant decentration between visits and no clear bias in the direction of the decentration. Conclusion: Objective analysis of digital retroillumination images taken at different postoperative periods shows the aspheric IOL platform was stable in the eye and is therefore suitable for the application of a toric surface to correct corneal astigmatism.

Subjective and objective performance of the Lenstec KH-3500 "accommodative" intraocular lens

Aim: To determine whether eyes implanted with the Lenstec KH-3500 "accommodative" intraocular lenses (IOLs) have improved subjective and objective focusing performance compared to a standard monofocal IOLs. Methods: 28 participants were implanted monocularly with a KH-3500 " accommodative" IOL and 20 controls with a Softec1 IOL. Outcome measures of refraction, visual acuity, subjective amplitude of accommodation, objective accommodative stimulus response curve, aberrometry, and Scheimpflug imaging were taken at ∼3 weeks and repeated after 6 months. Results: Best corrected acuity with the KH-3500 was 0.06 (SD 0.13) logMAR at distance and 0.58 (0.20) logMAR at near. Accommodation was 0.39 (0.53) D measured objectively and 3.1 (1.6) D subjectively. Higher order aberrations were 0.87 (0.85) μm and lower order were 0.24 (0.39) μm. Posterior subcapsular light scatter was 0.95% (1.37%) greater than IOL clarity. In comparison, all control group measures were similar except objective (0.17 (0.13) D; p = 0.032) and subjective (2.0 (0.9) D; p = 0.009) amplitude of accommodation. Six months following surgery, posterior subcapsular scatter had increased (p<0.01) in the KH-3500 implanted subjects and near word acuity had decreased (p<0.05). Conclusions: The objective accommodating effects of the KH-3500 IOL appear to be limited, although the subjective and objective accommodative range is significantly increased compared to control subjects implanted with conventional IOLs. However, this "accommodative" ability of the lens appears to have decreased by 6 months post-surgery.

Objective accommodative amplitude and dynamics with the 1CU accommodative intraocular lens

PURPOSE. To compare the objective accommodative amplitude and dynamics of eyes implanted with the one-compartment-unit (1CU; HumanOptics AG, Erlangen, Germany) accommodative intraocular lenses (IOLs) with that measured subjectively. METHODS. Twenty eyes with a 1CU accommodative IOL implanted were refracted and distance and near acuity measured with a logMAR (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) chart. The objective accommodative stimulus-response curve for static targets between 0.17 and 4.00 D accommodative demand was measured with the SRW-5000 (Shin-Nippon Commerce Inc., Tokyo, Japan) and PowerRefractor (PlusOptiX, Nürnberg, Germany) autorefractors. Continuous objective recording of dynamic accommodation was measured with the SRW-5000, with the subject viewing a target moving from 0 to 2.50 D at 0.3 Hz through a Badal lens system. Wavefront aberrometry measures (Zywave; Bausch & Lomb, Rochester, NY) were made through undilated pupils. Subjective amplitude of accommodation was measured with the RAF (Royal Air Force accommodation and vergence measurement) rule. RESULTS. Four months after implantation best-corrected acuity was -0.01 ± 0.16 logMAR at distance and 0.60 ± 0.09 logMAR at near. Objectively, the static amplitude of accommodation was 0.72 ± 0.38 D. The average dynamic amplitude of accommodation was 0.71 ± 0.47 D, with a lag behind the target of 0.50 ± 0.48 seconds. Aberrometry showed a decrease in power of the lens-eye combination from the center to the periphery in all subjects (on average, -0.38 ± 0.28 D/mm). Subjective amplitude of accommodation was 2.24 ± 0.42 D. Two years after 1CU implantation, refractive error and distance visual acuity remained relatively stable, but near visual acuity, and the subjective and objective amplitudes of accommodation decreased. CONCLUSIONS. The objective accommodating effects of the 1CU lens appear to be limited, although patients are able to track a moving target. Subjective and objective accommodation was reduced at the 2-year follow-up. The greater subjective amplitude of accommodation is likely to result from the eye's depth of focus of and the aspheric nature of the IOL. Copyright © Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology.

Visual performance of a new bi-aspheric, segmented, asymmetric multifocal IOL

PURPOSE: To assess the visual performance and subjective experience of eyes implanted with a new bi-aspheric, segmented, multifocal intraocular lens: the Mplus X (Topcon Europe Medical, Capelle aan den IJssel, Netherlands). METHODS: Seventeen patients (mean age: 64.0 ± 12.8 years) had binocular implantation (34 eyes) with the Mplus X. Three months after the implantation, assessment was made of: manifest refraction; uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity; uncorrected and distance corrected near visual acuity; defocus curves in photopic conditions; contrast sensitivity; halometry as an objective measure of glare; and patient satisfaction with unaided near vision using the Near Acuity Visual Questionnaire. RESULTS: Mean residual manifest refraction was -0.13 ± 0.51 diopters (D). Twenty-five eyes (74%) were within a mean spherical equivalent of ±0.50 D. Mean uncorrected distance visual acuity was +0.10 ± 0.12 logMAR monocularly and 0.02 ± 0.09 logMAR binocularly. Thirty-two eyes (94%) could read 0.3 or better without any reading correction and all patients could read 0.3 or better with a reading correction. Mean monocular uncorrected near visual acuity was 0.18 ± 0.16 logMAR, improving to 0.15 ± 0.15 logMAR with distance correction. Mean binocular uncorrected near visual acuity was 0.11 ± 0.11 logMAR, improving to 0.09 ± 0.12 logMAR with distance correction. Mean binocular contrast sensitivity was 1.75 ± 0.14 log units at 3 cycles per degree, 1.88 ± 0.20 log units at 6 cycles per degree, 1.66 ± 0.19 log units at 12 cycles per degree, and 1.11 ± 0.20 log units at 18 cycles per degree. Mean binocular and monocular halometry showed a glare profile of less than 1° of debilitating light scatter. Mean Near Acuity Visual Questionnaire Rasch score (0 = no difficulty, 100 = extreme difficulty) for satisfaction for near vision was 20.43 ± 14.64 log-odd units. CONCLUSIONS: The Mplus X provides a good visual outcome at distance and near with minimal dysphotopsia. Patients were very satisfied with their uncorrected near vision. © SLACK Incorporated.