Comparative Analysis of the Visual Performance After Cataract Surgery With Implantation of a Bifocal or Trifocal Diffractive IOL

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the visual, refractive, contrast sensitivity, and aberrometric outcomes with a diffractive bifocal and trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) of the same material and haptic design. METHODS: Sixty eyes of 30 patients undergoing bilateral cataract surgery were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of two groups: the bifocal group, including 30 eyes implanted with the bifocal diffractive IOL AT LISA 801 (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany), and the trifocal group, including eyes implanted with the trifocal diffractive IOL AT LISA tri 839 MP (Carl Zeiss Meditec). Analysis of visual and refractive outcomes, contrast sensitivity, ocular aberrations (OPD-Scan III; Nidek, Inc., Gagamori, Japan), and defocus curve were performed during a 3-month follow-up period. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences between groups were found in 3-month postoperative uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (P > .21). However, uncorrected, corrected, and distance-corrected near and intermediate visual acuities were significantly better in the trifocal group (P < .01). No significant differences between groups were found in postoperative spherical equivalent (P = .22). In the binocular defocus curve, the visual acuity was significantly better for defocus of -0.50 to -1.50 diopters in the trifocal group (P < .04) and -3.50 to -4.00 diopters in the bifocal group (P < .03). No statistically significant differences were found between groups in most of the postoperative corneal, internal, and ocular aberrations (P > .31), and in contrast sensitivity for most frequencies analyzed (P > .15). CONCLUSIONS: Trifocal diffractive IOLs provide significantly better intermediate vision over bifocal IOLs, with equivalent postoperative levels of visual and ocular optical quality.

Comparing a bifocal and trifocal diffractive IOL

With the recent development of trifocal diffractive IOLs, to overcome the potential limitation of a lack in intermediate distance vision, studies have been published confirming the benefit of these lenses. However, until now, there has been no comparative study between the visual performance achieved with a bifocal versus a trifocal diffractive IOL. In this article, the authors reveal the details and results of their recent comparative study of the AT LISA diffractive bifocal and trifocal lenses.

Wavefront analysis and modulation transfer function of three multifocal intraocular lenses

Purpose: To evaluate wavefront performance and modulation transfer function (MTF) in the human eye aft er the implantation of diffractive or refractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). Materials and Methods: This was a prospective, interventional, comparative, nonrandomized clinical study. Uncorrected distance and near visual acuity, and wavefront analysis including MTF curves (iTrace aberrometer, Tracey Technologies, Houston, TX, USA) were measured in 60 patients aft er bilateral IOL implantation with 6 months of follow-up. Forty eyes received the diffractive ReSTOR (Alcon), 40 eyes received the refractive ReZoom (Advanced Medical Optics) and 40 eyes, the Tecnis ZM900 (Advanced Medical Optics). The comparison of MTF and aberration between the intraocular lenses was performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by the Dunn test when necessary. Results: The mean uncorrected distance visual acuity was similar in all three groups of multifocal IOLs. The ReSTOR group provided better uncorrected near visual acuity than the ReZoom group (P < 0.001), but similar to the Tecnis group. Spherical aberration was significantly higher in the ReZoom group (P = 0.007). Similar MTF curves were found for the aspheric multifocal IOL Tecnis and the spheric multifocal IOL ReSTOR, and both performed better than the multifocal IOL ReZoom in a 5 mm pupil (P < 0.001 at all spatial frequencies). Conclusions: Diffractive IOLs studied presented similar MTF curves for a 5 mm pupil diameter. Both diffractive IOLs showed similar spherical aberration, which was significantly better with the full-diffractive IOL Tecnis than with the refractive IOL ReZoom.

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

PURPOSE: 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. SETTING: Rementeria Ophthalmological Clinic, Madrid, Spain. DESIGN: Prospective randomized masked study. METHOD: 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. RESULTS: 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). CONCLUSIONS: The diffractive multifocal IOL gave rise to a larger disk halo size, which was correlated with a worse low-contrast UDVA.

Exploring the optimum step size for defocus curves

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of reducing the number of visual acuity measurements made in a defocus curve on the quality of data quantified. Setting: Midland Eye, Solihull, United Kingdom. Design: Evaluation of a technique. Methods: Defocus curves were constructed by measuring visual acuity on a distance logMAR letter chart, randomizing the test letters between lens presentations. The lens powers evaluated ranged between +1.50 diopters (D) and -5.00 D in 0.50 D steps, which were also presented in a randomized order. Defocus curves were measured binocularly with the Tecnis diffractive, Rezoom refractive, Lentis rotationally asymmetric segmented (+3.00 D addition [add]), and Finevision trifocal multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) implanted bilaterally, and also for the diffractive IOL and refractive or rotationally asymmetric segmented (+3.00 D and +1.50 D adds) multifocal IOLs implanted contralaterally. Relative and absolute range of clear-focus metrics and area metrics were calculated for curves fitted using 0.50 D, 1.00 D, and 1.50 D steps and a near add-specific profile (ie, distance, half the near add, and the full near-add powers). Results: A significant difference in simulated results was found in at least 1 of the relative or absolute range of clear-focus or area metrics for each of the multifocal designs examined when the defocus-curve step size was increased (P<.05). Conclusion: Faster methods of capturing defocus curves from multifocal IOL designs appear to distort the metric results and are therefore not valid. Financial Disclosure: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned. © 2013 ASCRS and ESCRS.

Quantitative evaluation of visual function 12 months after bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal IOL

PURPOSE: To quantitatively evaluate visual function 12 months after bilateral implantation of the Physiol FineVision® trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) and to compare these results with those obtained in the first postoperative month. METHODS: In this prospective case series, 20 eyes of 10 consecutive patients were included. Monocular and binocular, uncorrected and corrected visual acuities (distance, near, and intermediate) were measured. Metrovision® was used to test contrast sensitivity under static and dynamic conditions, both in photopic and low-mesopic settings. The same software was used for pupillometry and glare evaluation. Motion, achromatic, and chromatic contrast discrimination were tested using 2 innovative psychophysical tests. A complete ophthalmologic examination was performed preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Psychophysical tests were performed 1 month after surgery and repeated 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Final distance uncorrected visual acuity (VA) was 0.00 ± 0.08 and distance corrected VA was 0.00 ± 0.05 logMAR. Distance corrected near VA was 0.00 ± 0.09 and distance corrected intermediate VA was 0.00 ± 0.06 logMAR. Glare testing, pupillometry, contrast sensitivity, motion, and chromatic and achromatic contrast discrimination did not differ significantly between the first and last visit (p>0.05) or when compared to an age-matched control group (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The Physiol FineVision® trifocal IOL provided satisfactory full range of vision and quality of vision parameters 12 months after surgery. Visual acuity and psychophysical tests did not vary significantly between the first and last visit.

Quantitative evaluation of visual function 12 months after bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal IOL

PURPOSE: To quantitatively evaluate visual function 12 months after bilateral implantation of the Physiol FineVision® trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) and to compare these results with those obtained in the first postoperative month. METHODS: In this prospective case series, 20 eyes of 10 consecutive patients were included. Monocular and binocular, uncorrected and corrected visual acuities (distance, near, and intermediate) were measured. Metrovision® was used to test contrast sensitivity under static and dynamic conditions, both in photopic and low-mesopic settings. The same software was used for pupillometry and glare evaluation. Motion, achromatic, and chromatic contrast discrimination were tested using 2 innovative psychophysical tests. A complete ophthalmologic examination was performed preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Psychophysical tests were performed 1 month after surgery and repeated 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Final distance uncorrected visual acuity (VA) was 0.00 ± 0.08 and distance corrected VA was 0.00 ± 0.05 logMAR. Distance corrected near VA was 0.00 ± 0.09 and distance corrected intermediate VA was 0.00 ± 0.06 logMAR. Glare testing, pupillometry, contrast sensitivity, motion, and chromatic and achromatic contrast discrimination did not differ significantly between the first and last visit (p>0.05) or when compared to an age-matched control group (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The Physiol FineVision® trifocal IOL provided satisfactory full range of vision and quality of vision parameters 12 months after surgery. Visual acuity and psychophysical tests did not vary significantly between the first and last visit.

Light-distortion analysis as a possible indicator of visual quality after refractive lens exchange with diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses

METHODS: Refractive lens exchange was performed with implantation of an AT Lisa 839M (trifocal) or 909MP (bifocal toric) IOL, the latter if corneal astigmatism was more than 0.75 diopter (D). The postoperative visual and refractive outcomes were evaluated. A prototype light-distortion analyzer was used to quantify the postoperative light-distortion indices. A control group of eyes in which a Tecnis ZCB00 1-piece monofocal IOL was implanted had the same examinations. RESULTS: A trifocal or bifocal toric IOL was implanted in 66 eyes. The control IOL was implanted in 18 eyes. All 3 groups obtained a significant improvement in uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) (P < .001) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) (P Z .001). The mean uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) was 0.123 logMAR with the trifocal IOL and 0.130 logMAR with the bifocal toric IOL. The residual refractive cylinder was less than 1.00 D in 86.7% of cases with the toric IOL. The mean light-distortion index was significantly higher in the multifocal IOL groups than in the monofocal group (P < .001), although no correlation was found between the light-distortion index and CDVA. CONCLUSIONS: The multifocal IOLs provided excellent UDVA and functional UNVA despite increased light-distortion indices. The light-distortion analyzer reliably quantified a subjective component of vision distinct from visual acuity; it may become a useful adjunct in the evaluation of visual quality obtained with multifocal IOLs.

Acquired oscillopsia: potential complication after multifocal IOL implantation

A healthy 60-year-old woman had uneventful bilateral sequential cataract surgery with diffractive multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Immediately after surgery in the first eye, the patient complained of right monocular oscillopsia during motion. Surgery in the second eye was followed by the same symptoms. Ocular motility was normal. Any movement of head or eye was accompanied by oscillopsia, disappearing immediately upon cessation of movement. Slitlamp examination revealed pseudophacodonesis, without obvious zonular laxity. We postulate that the rapid oscillation of an unsteady multifocal IOL during head or eye movement caused the optical steps to pass in front of the visual axis. Cataract surgeons must be aware of this potential, but rare, complication before deciding to implant a multifocal IOL.

Analysis of internal astigmatism and higher order aberrations in eyes implanted with a new diffractive multifocal toric intraocular lens

Background To evaluate the intraocular lens (IOL) position by analyzing the postoperative axis of internal astigmatism as well as the higher-order aberration (HOA) profile after cataract surgery following the implantation of a diffractive multifocal toric IOL. Methods Prospective study including 51 eyes with corneal astigmatism of 1.25D or higher of 29 patients with ages ranging between 20 and 61 years old. All cases underwent uneventful cataract surgery with implantation of the AT LISA 909 M toric IOL (Zeiss). Visual, refractive and corneal topograpy changes were evaluated during a 12-month follow-up. In addition, the axis of internal astigmatism as well as ocular, corneal, and internal HOA (5-mm pupil) were evaluated postoperatively by means of an integrated aberrometer (OPD Scan II, Nidek). Results A significant improvement in uncorrected distance and near visual acuities (p < 0.01) was found, which was consistent with a significant correction of manifest astigmatism (p < 0.01). No significant changes were observed in corneal astigmatism (p = 0.32). With regard to IOL alignment, the difference between the axes of postoperative internal and preoperative corneal astigmatisms was close to perpendicularity (12 months, 87.16° ± 7.14), without significant changes during the first 6 months (p ≥ 0.46). Small but significant changes were detected afterwards (p = 0.01). Additionally, this angular difference correlated with the postoperative magnitude of manifest cylinder (r = 0.31, p = 0.03). Minimal contribution of intraocular optics to the global magnitude of HOA was observed. Conclusions The diffractive multifocal toric IOL evaluated is able to provide a predictable astigmatic correction with apparent excellent levels of optical quality during the first year after implantation.

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.

Visual outcomes and subjective experience after bilateral implantation of a new diffractive trifocal intraocular lens

Purpose - To assess clinical outcomes and subjective experience after bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens (IOL). Setting - Midland Eye Institute, Solihull, United Kingdom. Design - Cohort study. Methods - Patients had bilateral implantation of Finevision trifocal IOLs. Uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), and manifest refraction were measured 2 months postoperatively. Defocus curves were assessed under photopic and mesopic conditions over a range of +1.50 to -4.00 diopters (D) in 0.50 D steps. Contrast sensitivity function was assessed under photopic conditions. Halometry was used to measure the angular size of monocular and binocular photopic scotomas arising from a glare source. Patient satisfaction with uncorrected near vision was assessed using the Near Activity Visual Questionnaire (NAVQ). Results - The mean monocular CDVA was 0.08 logMAR ± 0.08 (SD) and the mean binocular CDVA, 0.06 ± 0.08 logMAR. Defocus curve testing showed an extended range of clear vision from +1.00 to -2.50 D defocus, with a significant difference in acuity between photopic conditions and mesopic conditions at -1.50 D defocus only. Photopic contrast sensitivity was significantly better binocularly than monocularly at all spatial frequencies. Halometry showed a glare scotoma of a mean size similar to that in previous studies of multifocal and accommodating IOLs; there were no subjective complaints of dysphotopsia. The mean NAVQ Rasch score for satisfaction with near vision was 15.9 ± 10.7 logits. Conclusions - The trifocal IOL implanted binocularly produced good distance visual acuity and near and intermediate visual function. Patients were very satisfied with their uncorrected near vision.

Clinical evaluation of a multifocal aspheric diffractive intraocular lens

Aim: To evaluate the performance of an aspheric diffractive multifocal acrylic intraocular lens (IOL), ZMB00 1-Piece Tecnis. Setting: Five sites across Europe. Methods: Fifty-two patients with cataracts (average age 68.5±10.5 years, 35 female) were bilaterally implanted with the aspheric diffractive multifocal IOL after completing a questionnaire regarding their optical visual symptoms, use of visual correction and their visual satisfaction. The questionnaire was completed again 4-6 months after surgery along with measures of uncorrected and best-corrected distance and near visual acuity, under photopic and mesopic lighting, reading ability, defocus curve testing and ocular examination for adverse events. Results: The residual refractive error was 0.01±0.47D with 56% of eyes within ±0.25D and 97% within ±1.0D. Uncorrected visual acuity was 0.02±0.10logMAR at distance and 0.15±0.30 logMAR at near, only reducing to 0.07±0.10logMAR at distance and 0.21±0.25logMAR at near in mesopic conditions.The defocus curve showed a near addition between 2.5-3.0 D allowing a reading acuity of 0.08±0.13 logMAR, with a range of clear vision <0.3 logMAR of ∼4.0 D. The average reading speed was 121.4±30.8 words per minute. Spectacle independence was 100% for distance and 88% for near, with high levels of satisfaction reported. Overall rating of vision without glasses could be explained (r=0.760) by preoperative best-corrected distance acuity, postoperative reading acuity and postoperative uncorrected distance acuity in photopic conditions (p<0.001). Only two minor adverse events occurred. Conclusions: The ZMB00 1-Piece Tecnis multifocal IOL provides a good visual outcome at distance and near with minimal adverse effects.

Visual outcomes after bilateral trifocal diffractive intraocular lens implantation

Background In recent years new models of intraocular lenses are appearing on the market to reduce requirements for additional optical correction. The purpose of this study is to assess visual outcomes following bilateral cataract surgery and the implant of a FineVision® trifocal intraocular lens (IOL). Methods Prospective, nonrandomized, observational study. Vision was assessed in 44 eyes of 22 patients (mean age 68.4 ± 5.5 years) before and 3 months after surgery. Aberrations were determined using the Topcon KR-1 W wave-front analyzer. LogMAR visual acuity was measured at distance (corrected distance visual acuity, CDVA 4 m), intermediate (distance corrected intermediate visual acuity, DCIVA 60 cm) and near (distance corrected near visual acuity, DCNVA 40 cm). The Pelli-Robson letter chart and the CSV-1000 test were used to estimate contrast sensitivity (CS). Defocus curve testing was performed in photopic and mesopic conditions. Adverse photic phenomena were assessed using the Halo v1.0 program. Results Mean aberration values for a mesopic pupil diameter were: total HOA RMS: 0.41 ± 0.30 μm, coma: 0.32 ± 0.22 μm and spherical aberration: 0.21 ± 0.20 μm. Binocular logMAR measurements were: CDVA −0.05 ± 0.05, DCIVA 0.15 ± 0.10, and DCNVA 0.06 ± 0.10. Mean Pelli-Robson CS was 1.40 ± 0.14 log units. Mean CSV100 CS for the 4 frequencies examined (A: 3 cycles/degree (cpd), B: 6 cpd, C: 12 cpd, D: 18 cpd) were 1.64 ± 0.14, 1.77 ± 0.18, 1.44 ± 0.24 and 0.98 ± 0.24 log units, respectively. Significant differences were observed in defocus curves for photopic and mesopic conditions (p < 0.0001). A mean disturbance index of 0.28 ± 0.22 was obtained. Conclusions Bilateral FineVision IOL implant achieved a full range of adequate vision, satisfactory contrast sensitivity, and a lack of significant adverse photic phenomena. Trial registration Eudract Clinical Trials Registry Number: 2014-003266-2.

Diffractive phase-shift lithography photomask operating in proximity printing mode

A phase shift proximity printing lithographic mask is designed, manufactured and tested. Its design is based on a Fresnel computer-generated hologram, employing the scalar diffraction theory. The obtained amplitude and phase distributions were mapped into discrete levels. In addition, a coding scheme using sub-cells structure was employed in order to increase the number of discrete levels, thus increasing the degree of freedom in the resulting mask. The mask is fabricated on a fused silica substrate and an amorphous hydrogenated carbon (a:C-H) thin film which act as amplitude modulation agent. The lithographic image is projected onto a resist coated silicon wafer, placed at a distance of 50 mu m behind the mask. The results show a improvement of the achieved resolution - linewidth as good as 1.5 mu m - what is impossible to obtain with traditional binary masks in proximity printing mode. Such achieved dimensions can be used in the fabrication of MEMS and MOEMS devices. These results are obtained with a UV laser but also with a small arc lamp light source exploring the partial coherence of this source. (C) 2010 Optical Society of America