scholarly journals Comparative Analysis of Visual Performance and Astigmatism Tolerance with Monofocal, Bifocal, and Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lenses Targeting Slight Myopia

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Jie Xu ◽  
Tianyu Zheng ◽  
Yi Lu
Keyword(s):  
Contrast Sensitivity ◽  
Significant Negative Correlation ◽  
Optical Quality ◽  
Corneal Astigmatism ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Visual Performance ◽  
Depth Of Focus ◽  
Visual Outcomes ◽  
Extended Depth Of Focus ◽  
Visual Function Questionnaire

Purpose. To compare the visual performance and astigmatism tolerance of 3 intraocular lens (IOL) groups: monofocal, bifocal, and extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) IOLs targeting slight myopia. Methods. Overall, there were 60 cataract surgery eyes from 60 patients with implantation of a monofocal, bifocal, or EDOF IOL (20 eyes in each IOL group). The EDOF IOLs targeted slight myopia (−0.25 D to −0.75 D). Intragroup comparison of visual acuity, defocus curve, objective optical quality, contrast sensitivity, visual function questionnaire scores, patients’ overall satisfaction, and the astigmatism tolerance was performed 3 months after surgery. Results. The EDOF group provided equivalently excellent distance visual outcomes (0.06 ± 0.12) as the monofocal (0.06 ± 0.09) and bifocal (0.03 ± 0.09) groups P = 0.554 , better intermediate vision than the other 2 groups P < 0.05 , and similarly satisfactory near visual outcomes (0.23 ± 0.16 at 20 cm, and 0.17 ± 0.14 at 33 cm) as the bifocal group (0.28 ± 0.14 at 20 cm and 0.08 ± 0.10 at 33 cm) P > 0.05 . The contrast sensitivity of EDOF IOL was slightly decreased compared to that of monofocal IOL, but it was better than that of bifocal IOL. The EDOF group showed significantly higher satisfaction than the bifocal group did when preoperative corneal astigmatism was 0.75 D or greater P = 0.009 . A significant negative correlation between the corneal astigmatism and patient satisfaction was observed in only the bifocal group. Conclusions. The EDOF IOLs targeting slight myopia offered satisfactory visual outcomes at an extended range from far to near distances. The EDOF and monofocal IOLs showed a better tolerance to astigmatism than did the bifocal IOL.

scholarly journals Comparative analysis of visual performance and astigmatism tolerance with monofocal, bifocal, and extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses targeting slight myopia

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jie Xu ◽  
Tianyu Zheng ◽  
Yi Lu
Keyword(s):  
Contrast Sensitivity ◽  
Significant Negative Correlation ◽  
Optical Quality ◽  
Corneal Astigmatism ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Visual Performance ◽  
Depth Of Focus ◽  
Visual Outcomes ◽  
Extended Depth Of Focus ◽  
Visual Function Questionnaire

Abstract BackgroundTo compare the visual performance and astigmatism tolerance of 3 intraocular lens (IOLs): monofocal, bifocal, and extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) IOLs targeting slight myopia.MethodsOverall, there were 60 cataract surgery eyes from 60 patients with implantation of a monofocal, bifocal or EDOF IOL (20 eyes in each IOL group). The EDOF IOLs targeted slight myopia (-0.25 D to -0.75 D). Intragroup comparison of visual acuity, defocus curve, objective optical quality, contrast sensitivity, Visual function questionnaire scores, patients’ overall satisfaction, and the astigmatism tolerance were performed 3 months after surgery.ResultsThe EDOF group provided equivalently excellent distance visual outcomes (0.06±0.12) as the monofocal (0.06±0.09) and bifocal (0.03±0.09) groups (P=0.554), better intermediate vision than the other 2 groups (P<0.05), and similarly satisfactory near visual outcomes (0.23±0.16 at 20 cm, and 0.17±0.14 at 33 cm) as the bifocal group (0.28±0.14 at 20 cm, and 0.08±0.10 at 33 cm) (P>0.05). The contrast sensitivity of EDOF IOL was slightly decreased compared to that of monofocal IOL, but it was better than that of bifocal IOL. The EDOF group showed significantly higher satisfaction than the bifocal group did when preoperative corneal astigmatism was 0.75 D or greater (P=0.009). A significant negative correlation between the corneal astigmatism and patient satisfaction was observed in only the bifocal group. ConclusionsThe EDOF IOLs targeting slight myopia offered satisfactory visual outcomes at an extended range from far to near distances. The EDOF and monofocal IOLs showed a better tolerance to astigmatism than did the bifocal IOL.

scholarly journals Functional visual acuity after implantation of diffractive extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses using an echelett optics

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Toshihiro Sakisaka ◽  
Keiichiro Minami ◽  
Keita Takada ◽  
Yosai Mori ◽  
Kazunori Miyata
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Contrast Sensitivity ◽  
Visual Function ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Depth Of Focus ◽  
Mean Response Time ◽  
Extended Depth Of Focus ◽  
Functional Visual Acuity ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Background The prospective comparative case series aimed to evaluate all-distance visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and functional visual acuity (FVA) of eyes with diffractive extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses (IOLs) using an echelett optics and monofocal IOLs with the same platform. Methods Diffractive EDOF and monofocal IOLs were implanted in 27 eyes of 27 patients each. At 3 months after implantation, all-distance visual acuities at distances of 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 1, 2, 3, and 5 m were measured under distance-corrected. Static visual function was also examined using photopic contrast sensitivity and area under the logarithmic contrast sensitivity function (AULCSF). Dynamic visual function was examined with FVA, and mean FVA value, visual maintenance ratio (VMR), mean response time, and number of blinks were evaluated. These outcomes were compared between the two IOLs. Results The mean distance-corrected visual acuities were better at distances of 0.7 m or nearer in eyes with EDOF IOLs. There was no difference in the contrast sensitivities (P > 0.22). In the FVA results, no difference was found in mean FVA and VMR (P > 0.68). Conclusion The static and dynamic evaluations of postoperative visual functions demonstrated that the visual function of eyes with EDOF IOLs under photopic and distance-corrected conditions was comparable to eyes with monofocal IOLs.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of extended depth of focus intraocular lenses in cataract surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Liu ◽  
Yi Dong ◽  
Yan Wang
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Contrast Sensitivity ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Depth Of Focus ◽  
Extended Depth Of Focus ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Near Visual Acuity

Abstract Background : This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenes (IOLs) in cataract surgery. Methods: All comparative clinical trials that involved bilaterally implanting EDOF IOLs in patients with cataract were retrieved from the literature database. We used random effects models to pool weighted mean differences (WMD) and risk ratio (RR) for continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively. Results: Nine studies with a total of 1336 eyes were identified. The subgroup analysis was conducted according to the type of IOLs used in the control group. Compared with monofocal IOLs, EDOF IOLs produced better uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (WMD: -0.17, 95% CI: -0.26 to -0.08, P = 0.0001) and uncorrected near visual acuity (WMD: -0.17, 95% CI: -0.21 to -0.12, P < 0.00001). EDOF IOLs resulted in reduced contrast sensitivity, more frequent halos, however, higher spectacle independence (RR: 2.81, 95% CI: 1.06 to 7.46, P = 0.04) than monofocal IOLs. Compared with trifocal IOLs, EDOF IOLs produced worse near visual acuity (MD: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.13, P<0.0001). EDOF IOLs performed better than trifocal IOls in contrast sensitivity, and there were no significant difference in halos and spectacle independence. Serious postoperative complications were rare, with no adverse events were reported in most studies. Conclusions: Increasing the risk of contrast reduction and more frequent halos, EDOF IOLs provided better intermediate and near VAs than monofocal IOLs. At the expense of near vision, patients receiving EDOF IOLs have better contrast sensitivity than those receiving trifocal IOLs. Halo incidence and spectacle independence of EDOF IOLs were similar to those of trifocal IOLs.

scholarly journals Through-Focus Vision Performance and Light Disturbances of 3 New Intraocular Lenses for Presbyopia Correction

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Santiago Escandón-García ◽  
Filomena J. Ribeiro ◽  
Colm McAlinden ◽  
António Queirós ◽  
José M. González-Méijome
Keyword(s):  
Contrast Sensitivity ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Sensitivity Function ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Clinical Population ◽  
Subjective Response ◽  
Depth Of Focus ◽  
Extended Depth Of Focus ◽  
Intermediate Distance ◽  
Presbyopia Correction

Purpose. To compare the through-focus visual performance in a clinical population of pseudophakic patients implanted with two new trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and one extended depth of focus IOL. Methods. Prospective, nonrandomized, examiner-masked case series. Twenty-three patients received the FineVision® and seven patients received the PanOptix™ trifocal IOLs. Fifteen patients received the Symfony extended depth of focus IOL. Mean age of patients was 63 ± 8 years. Through-focus visual acuity was measured from –3.00 to +1.00 D vergences. Contrast sensitivity was measured with and without a source of glare. Light disturbances were evaluated with the Light Distortion Analyzer. Results. Though-focus evaluation showed that trifocal IOLs performed significantly better at near distance (33 and 40 cm), and extended depth of focus performed significantly better at intermediate distance (1.0 m). Contrast sensitivity function with glare and dysphotopsia was similar between the three IOLs and subjective response to questionnaire showed a significantly higher score (worse performance) for the extended depth of focus IOL compared to both trifocal IOLs in the bothersome subscale (p<0.05). Conclusions. Trifocal IOLs grant better performance at near distance while extended depth of focus IOL performs better at intermediate distance. Objective dysphotopsia measured with the Light Distortion Analyzer is not reduced in extended depth of focus IOL compared to trifocal IOLs.

scholarly journals One-year post-operative comparison of visual function and patient satisfaction with trifocal and extended depth of focus intraocular lenses

2021 ◽  
pp. 112067212110697
Author(s):  
Elizabeth M. Law ◽  
Rajesh K. Aggarwal ◽  
Hetal Buckhurst ◽  
Hosam E. Kasaby ◽  
Jonathan Marsden ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Contrast Sensitivity ◽  
Early Period ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Depth Of Focus ◽  
Extended Depth Of Focus ◽  
Quality Of Vision ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
One Year

Purpose To evaluate visual performance with trifocal and extended depth of focus IOL at 1 year post-operatively. Setting BMI Southend Hospital. Design Cohort study. Methods An age-matched cohort of forty subjects bilaterally implanted with the AT LISA 839MP trifocal IOL (20 patients, 40 eyes) and the Tecnis Symfony extended depth of focus IOL (20 patients, 40 eyes) were assessed at 3–6 months and 12–18 months post-operatively. Primary outcome measures were distance (6 m), intermediate (70 cm), near visual acuity (40 cm), and analysis of defocus profiles. Secondary outcomes included contrast sensitivity, Radner reading performance, quality of vision and assessment of halos. Results Distance visual acuity (VA) and defocus areas were similar ( p = 0.07). No significant difference in intermediate VA was noted but the intermediate area of focus was greater in the EDoF (0.31 ± 0.12 LogMAR*m−1) compared to the trifocal (0.22 ± 0.08LogMAR*m−1) ( p = 0.02). However, all near metrics were significantly better in the trifocal group. 80% of trifocal subjects were spectacle independent compared to 50% EDoF subjects. Quality of vision questionnaire found no significant differences between groups, however halo scores were greater at 3–6 months in the trifocal group ( p < 0.01) but no differences were noted at 12–18 months. Conclusions Near vision is significantly better for the trifocal, thus greater levels of spectacle independence. The range of intermediate vision was greater for the EDoF but no difference in intermediate VA. In the early period, differences in contrast sensitivity and halo size/intensity were noted, however, by one-year these measures were not significantly different.

Visual performance comparison of 2 extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 388-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Merita Schojai ◽  
Tim Schultz ◽  
Corinna Jerke ◽  
Jörg Böcker ◽  
H. Burkhard Dick
Keyword(s):  
Performance Comparison ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Visual Performance ◽  
Depth Of Focus ◽  
Extended Depth Of Focus

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of extended depth of focus intraocular lenses in cataract surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Liu ◽  
Yi Dong ◽  
Yan Wang
Keyword(s):  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Contrast Sensitivity ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Depth Of Focus ◽  
Extended Depth Of Focus ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Near Visual Acuity

Abstract Background This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenes (IOLs) in cataract surgery. Methods All comparative clinical trials that involved bilaterally implanting EDOF IOLs in patients with cataract were retrieved from the literature database. We used random effects models to pool weighted mean differences (WMD) and risk ratio (RR) for continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively. Results Nine studies with a total of 1336 eyes were identified. The subgroup analysis was conducted according to the type of IOLs used in the control group. Compared with monofocal IOLs, EDOF IOLs produced better uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (WMD: -0.17, 95% CI: -0.26 to -0.08, P = 0.0001) and uncorrected near visual acuity (WMD: -0.17, 95% CI: -0.21 to -0.12, P < 0.00001). EDOF IOLs resulted in reduced contrast sensitivity, more frequent halos, however, higher spectacle independence (RR: 2.81, 95% CI: 1.06 to 7.46, P = 0.04) than monofocal IOLs. Compared with trifocal IOLs, EDOF IOLs produced worse near visual acuity (MD: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.13, P<0.0001). EDOF IOLs performed better than trifocal IOls in contrast sensitivity, and there were no significant difference in halos and spectacle independence. Conclusions Increasing the risk of contrast reduction and more frequent halos, EDOF IOLs provided better intermediate and near VAs than monofocal IOLs. At the expense of near vision, patients receiving EDOF IOLs have better contrast sensitivity than those receiving trifocal IOLs. Halo incidence and spectacle independence of EDOF IOLs were similar to those of trifocal IOLs.

Visual Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction for Trifocal, Extended Depth of Focus and Monofocal Intraocular Lenses

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (7) ◽  
pp. 434-440 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luba Rodov ◽  
Olga Reitblat ◽  
Adi Levy ◽  
Ehud I. Assia ◽  
Guy Kleinmann
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Depth Of Focus ◽  
Visual Outcomes ◽  
Extended Depth Of Focus

scholarly journals Comparison of trifocal or hybrid multifocal-extended depth of focus intraocular lenses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yueyang Zhong ◽  
Kai Wang ◽  
Xiaoning Yu ◽  
Xin Liu ◽  
Ke Yao
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Visual Acuity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Visual Quality ◽  
Intraocular Lenses ◽  
Depth Of Focus ◽  
Refractive Lens Exchange ◽  
Extended Depth Of Focus ◽  
Refractive Lens ◽  
Near Visual Acuity

AbstractThis meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes following implantation of trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) or a hybrid multifocal-extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL in cataract or refractive lens exchange surgeries. We examined 13 comparative studies with bilateral implantation of trifocal (898 eyes) or hybrid multifocal-EDOF (624 eyes) IOLs published through 1 March 2020. Better uncorrected and corrected near visual acuity (VA) were observed in the trifocal group (MD: − 0.143, 95% CI: − 0.192 to − 0.010, P < 0.001 and MD: − 0.149, 95% CI: − 0.217 to − 0.082, P < 0.001, respectively), while the hybrid multifocal-EDOF group presented better uncorrected intermediate VA (MD: 0.055, 95% CI: 0.016 to 0.093, P = 0.005). Trifocal IOLs were more likely to achieve spectacle independence at near distance (RR: 1.103, 95% CI: 1.036 to 1.152, P = 0.002). The halo photic effect was generated more frequently by the trifocal IOLs (RR: 1.318, 95% CI: 1.025 to 1.696, P = 0.031). Contrast sensitivity and subjective visual quality yielded comparable results between groups. Trifocal IOLs demonstrated better performance at near distance but apparently led to more photic disturbances. Our findings provided the most up-to-date and comprehensive evidence by comparing the benefits of advanced IOLs in clinical practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document