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.

Effect of+3.00 diopter and+4.00 diopter additions in multifocal intraocular lenses on defocus profiles, patient satisfaction, and contrast sensitivity

PURPOSE: To evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of the new low-addition (add) (+3.00 diopter [D]) ReSTOR multifocal IOL compared with the preceding ReSTOR model with +4.00 D add. SETTING: University Eye Hospital, Tuebingen, Germany. DESIGN: Comparative case series. METHODS: Patients with a +3.00 D or +4.00 D add multifocal IOL were examined for uncorrected and distance-corrected visual acuity at distance, intermediate, and near. A defocus profile was assessed, individual reading distance and the distance for lowest intermediate visual acuity were determined. Patient satisfaction was evaluated with a standardized questionnaire. Contrast sensitivity was tested under mesopic and photopic conditions. RESULTS: Uncorrected and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuities were statistically significantly better in the +3.00 D add group (24 eyes) than in the +4.00 D add group (30 eyes); distance and near visual acuities were not different between groups. The defocus profile significantly varied between groups. The +4.00 D add group had a closer reading distance (33.0 cm) than the +3.00 D add group (43.5 cm), a closer point of lowest intermediate visual acuity (65.8 cm versus 86.9 cm) and worse lowest intermediate visual acuity (20/59 +/- 4.5 letters [SD] versus 20/48 +/- 5.5 letters). Thus, patients in the +3.00 D add group reported being more satisfied with intermediate visual acuity. The +3.00 D add group reported more glare but less halos than the +4.00 D add group; contrast sensitivity was not different. CONCLUSION: The lower addition resulted in a narrower defocus profile, a farther reading distance, and better intermediate visual acuity and thus increased patient satisfaction.

Comparison of reading performance after bilateral implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses with+3.00 or+4.00 diopter addition

PURPOSE To compare reading ability after cataract surgery and bilateral implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with a +3 00 diopter (D) addition (add) or a +4 00 D add SETTING Department of Ophthalmology, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil DESIGN Prospective comparative study METHODS Patients scheduled for cataract surgery were randomly assigned to bilateral implantation of an aspheric AcrySof ReSTOR multifocal IOL with a +3 00 diopter (D) addition (add) or a +4 00 D add The reading speed, critical print size, and reading acuity were measured binocularly with best correction using MNREAD acuity charts 6 months after surgery Patients were tested with the chart at the best patient-preferred reading distance and at 40 cm Binocular uncorrected and best distance-corrected visual acuities at far and near were also measured RESULTS The study enrolled 32 patients At the best reading distance the results were similar between the 2 IOL groups in all reading parameters When tested at 40 cm, reading speed at all print sizes from 03 to 00 (all P< 001), critical print size (P< 001) and reading acuity (P = 014) were statistically significantly better in the +3 00 D IOL group than in the +4 00 DIOL group Uncorrected and corrected visual acuities at far and near were similar between the 2 groups CONCLUSION Although the 2 IOL groups had similar performance in reading parameters, patients had to adjust to their best reading distance The +3 00 D IOL performed better than the +4 00 D IOL at 40 cm

Combined Ex-PRESS LR-50/IOL implantation in modified deep sclerectomy plus pharmacoemulsification for glaucoma associated with cataract

RAPPORT DE SYNTHESEBUTLe but de cette étude est de suivre prospectivement les résultats d'une sclérectomie profonde (SP) modifiée en utilisant le tube Ex-PRJESS LR-50, associée à une phacoémulsification avec implantation d'une lentille intraoculaire (LIO), dans la chirurgie combinée du glaucome et de la cataracte.METHODENous avons inclus dans l'étude 24 yeux de 24 patients présentant un glaucome médicalement non contrôlé et une cataracte justifiant son ablation.Une phacoémulsification avec implantation d'une LIO est effectuée. Puis le tube Ex-PRESS LR-50 est inséré au niveau du canal de Schlemm, dans la chambre antérieure, sous un volet scléral. Une SP postérieure partielle est ensuite pratiquée afin de créer une bulle de filtration intrasclérale.Le taux de succès complet a été défini par une pression intraoculaire (PIO) <18 mmHg sans traitement et le taux de succès relatif par une PIO <18 mmHg avec ou sans traitement. En cas de fibrose ou de kyste de la bulle de filtration, une injection sous-conjonctivale d'une solution de Mitomycin C à 0.02% est réalisée, avec ou sans needling.RESULTATSLe suivi moyen était de 40.1±10.8 [moyenne±DS] mois. En préopératoire, la PIO se situait à 18.1 ±5.3 mmHg; la meilleure acuité visuelle corrigée (MAVC) était mesurée à 0.6±0.3 (échelle de Snellen) et le nombre de médicaments hypotenseurs oculaires était de 2.3±1.1. La PIO a diminué de 25.4% à 24 mois et de 27.0% à 48 mois. A 24 mois, 19 patients (86.3%) avaient une MAVC supérieure ou égal à 0.5, et à 48 mois la MAVC était mesurée à 0.7±0.3. Lors de la dernière visite, le nombre moyen de médicaments se situait à 0.6±0.8 (p<0.05). Des injections sous conjonctivales d'une solution de Mitomycin C à 0.02% ont été nécessaires dans 5 yeux. Aucune érosion conjonctivale n'a été constatée. Deux complications majeures ont été observées. Une endophtalmie, deux jours après l'intervention chirurgicale avec phtisis secondaire du globe oculaire. Une obstruction du tube Ex-PRESS LR-50 par de la fibrine, ayant justifié son ablation avec SP classique en un autre site.CONCLUSIONLe tube Ex-PRESS LR-50 inséré dans la chambre antérieure avec une SP modifiée réduit efficacement la PIO dans la chirurgie combinée du glaucome et prévient l'érosion conjonctivale, une complication importante lorsque l'implant n'est pas couvert par un volet scléral.

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.

A New Imaging Software To Evaluate The Centration Of Capsulorhexis And Intraocular Lens (IOL) After Cataract Surgery

Purpose: IOL centration and stability after cataract surgery is of high interest for cataract surgeons and IOL-producing companies. We present a new imaging software to evaluate the centration of the rhexis and the centration of the IOL after cataract surgery.Methods: We developed, in collaboration with the Biomedical Imaging Group (BIG), EPFL, Lausanne, a new working tool in order to assess precisely outcomes after IOL-implantation, such as ideal capsulorhexis and IOL-centration. The software is a plug-in of ImageJ, a general-purpose image processing and image-analysis package. The specifications of this software are: evaluation of the rhexis-centration and evaluation the position of the IOL in the posterior chamber. The end points are to analyze the quality of the centration of a rhexis after cataract surgery, the deformation of the rhexis with capsular bag retraction and the centration of the IOL after implantation.Results: This software delivers tools to interactively measure the distances between limbus, IOL and capsulorhexis and its changes over time. The user is invited to adjust nodes of three radial curves for the limbus, rhexis and the optic of the IOL. The radial distances of the curves are computed to evaluate the IOL implantation. The user is also able to define patterns for ideal capsulorhexis and optimal IOL-centration. We are going to present examples of calculations after cataract surgery.Conclusions: Evaluation of the centration of the rhexis and of the IOL after cataract surgery is an important end point for optimal IOL implantation after cataract surgery. Especially multifocal or accommodative lenses need a precise position in the bag with a good stability over time. This software is able to evaluate these parameters just after the surgery but also its changes over time. The results of these evaluations can lead to an optimizing of surgical procedures and materials.

Visual outcomes and pacient satisfaction follwing implantation of a supplementary multifocal IOL in patients undergoing cataract surgery

Purpose: To assess visual outcomes and patient satisfaction following implantation of the Sulcoflex® multifocal intraocular lens (IOL; Rayner Intraocular Lenses Ltd., Hove, UK) in a procedure combining capsular bag lens implantation with sulcus placement of the Sulcoflex® IOL. Setting: Instituto de Oftalmologia de Assis, Assis, SP, Brazil. Methods: Cataract patients > 45 years, with hyperopia ≥ 1.50 D and potential acuity measurement ≥ 20/30 undergoing Sulcoflex® multifocal IOL implantation were included. Monocular and binocular uncorrected near and distance visual acuity (VA) were evaluated at five days, one month, and three months postoperatively. Contrast sensitivity and refraction were measured in a subset of patients three months postoperatively. Patient satisfaction was assessed one month postoperative. Results: This non-consecutive case series comprised 25 eyes of 13 patients. Eleven eyes (52%) had pre-existing retinal pathologies. Monocular distance VA improved significantly at all follow-up visits. At final follow-up, 88% of eyes had monocular uncorrected distance VA (UDVA) of at least 20/25 and 24% had monocular UDVA of 20/20. All eyes had binocular UDVA of at least 20/25, and 58% had binocular UDVA of 20/20. Monocular uncorrected near vision (UNVA) was J1 in 68% of eyes and all patients had binocular UNVA of J1. Of all eyes studied, 92% and 58% achieved a spherical equivalent within 1 D and −0.5 D, respectively. The majority of patients reported satisfaction with visual outcomes. Complications included a postoperative intraocular pressure spike in four eyes. Conclusion: The Sulcoflex® multifocal IOL improves near and distance VA in cataract patients with retinal abnormalities and good VA potential.

Modulation transfer function and optical quality after bilateral implantation of a+3.00 D versus a+4.00 D multifocal intraocular lens

PURPOSE: To determine whether the improvement in intermediate vision after bilateral implantation of an aspheric multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) with a +3.00 diopter (D) addition (add) occurs at the expense of optical quality compared with the previous model with a +4.00 D add. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil. DESIGN: Prospective randomized double-masked comparative clinical trial. METHODS: One year after bilateral implantation of Acrysof Restor SN6AD1 +3.00 D IOLs or Acrysof Restor SN6AD3 +4.00 D IOLs, optical quality was evaluated by analyzing the in vivo modulation transfer function (MTF) and point-spread function (expressed as Strehl ratio). The Strehl ratio and MTF curve with a 4.0 pupil and a 6.0 mm pupil were measured by dynamic retinoscopy aberrometry. The uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuities at 4 m, uncorrected and distance-corrected near visual acuities at 40 cm, and uncorrected and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuities at 50 cm, 60 cm, and 70 cm were measured. RESULTS: Both IOL groups comprised 40 eyes of 20 patients. One year postoperatively, there were no statistically significant between-group differences in the MTF or Strehl ratio with either pupil size. There were no statistically significant between-group differences in distance or near visual acuity. Intermediate visual acuity was significantly better in the +3.00 D IOL group. CONCLUSION: Results indicate that the improvement in intermediate vision in eyes with the aspheric multifocal +3.00 D add IOL occurred without decreasing optical quality over that with the previous version IOL with a +4.00 D add.

Secondary intraocular lenses in eyes with aphakia or dislocated IOL: impact of suture fixation on early and late complications

BACKGROUND: Secondary intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is exposed to an increased risk of complications, including endophthalmitis and retinal detachment. The present analysis compares the outcomes and complications experienced in our own series of patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of secondary posterior chamber IOL implantations performed in a single centre, two surgeon setting over a period of 8 years and with a follow up-time of at least 4 months. RESULTS: Between 1997 and 2005, 75 patients received a sulcus-supported secondary IOL without suture fixation, whereas suture fixation was required in 137 instances. Visual acuity improved in both groups (group 1: from 0.36 +/- 0.39 (0.01-1.2) to 0.73 +/- 0.33 (0.02-1.0; p = 0.18); group 2: from 0.33 +/- 0.34 (0.02-1.0) to 0.46 +/- 0.33 (0.01-1.0; p = 0.006), but more pronounced in eyes not requiring suture fixation (p = 0.012). IOL placement was more likely to be combined with endophacoemulsification in the not suture-fixed IOLs (12.7 vs. 5.3 %). In contrast, retinal tears (10.6 vs. 8.6 %, respectively) and retinal detachment (5.3 vs. 2.2 %, respectively) were equally distributed. In the early postoperative phase, IOP was lower in suture-fixed eyes, which showed a higher incidence of minor intraocular haemorrhages and cystoid macular edema (5.3 vs. 8.0 %); late complications up to 5 years postoperatively were equally distributed. CONCLUSION: A preoperatively less complicated anterior segment situation and a lower incidence of postoperative macular edema may account for a better visual outcome after placement of a sulcus supported IOLs without suturing. If required, suture fixation may be performed without exposing the eye to an increased risk of late postoperative complications.

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.

Minimizing the IOL Power Error Induced by Keratometric Power

Purpose. To evaluate theoretically in normal eyes the influence on IOL power (PIOL) calculation of the use of a keratometric index (nk) and to analyze and validate preliminarily the use of an adjusted keratometric index (nkadj) in the IOL power calculation (PIOLadj). Methods. A model of variable keratometric index (nkadj) for corneal power calculation (Pc) was used for IOL power calculation (named PIOLadj). Theoretical differences ($PIOL) between the new proposed formula (PIOLadj) and which is obtained through Gaussian optics (PIOL Gauss) were determined using Gullstrand and Le Grand eye models. The proposed new formula for IOL power calculation (PIOLadj) was prevalidated clinically in 81 eyes of 81 candidates for corneal refractive surgery and compared with Haigis, HofferQ, Holladay, and SRK/T formulas. Results. A theoretical PIOL underestimation greater than 0.5 diopters was present in most of the cases when nk = 1.3375 was used. If nkadj was used for Pc calculation, a maximal calculated error in $PIOL of T0.5 diopters at corneal vertex in most cases was observed independently from the eye model, r1c, and the desired postoperative refraction. The use of nkadj in IOL power calculation (PIOLadj) could be valid with effective lens position optimization nondependent of the corneal power. Conclusions. The use of a single value of nk for Pc calculation can lead to significant errors in PIOL calculation that may explain some IOL power overestimations with conventional formulas. These inaccuracies can be minimized by using the new PIOLadj based on the algorithm of nkadj.

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.