Distance and Near Visual Acuity Improvement After Implantation of Multifocal Intraocular Lenses in Cataract Patients With Presbyopia: A Systematic Review

Objectives: This study was designed to analyse the outcomes of secondary multifocal intraocular lens implantation in eyes with white cataracts. Methods: White cataract patients undergoing secondary multifocal intraocular lens implantation between June 2014 and January 2015 were evaluated prospectively. As opposed to a conventional primary intraocular lens implantation for an optimal patient, the white cataract was first extracted, followed by optical biometry measurements. Whether or not the patient had adequate visual acuity was identified, and the multifocal intraocular lens was implanted secondarily. A total of five appropriate white cataract patients were enrolled in this secondary multifocal intraocular lens implantation study and were retrospectively reviewed. Results: All five secondary implantations of the multifocal intraocular lenses were successful, without obvious adverse events. The uncorrected near visual acuity LogMAR was 0.4–0.5, and the distance visual acuity was −0.1 to 0.1 after 12 months of the multifocal intraocular lens implantation. All patients achieved satisfactory near and distance visual acuities and spectacle freedom. Conclusion: Two-stage multifocal intraocular lens implantation is a safe and novel technique for the management of white cataract patients to optimise near and distance visual acuities.

Download Full-text

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

Scientific Reports ◽

10.1038/s41598-021-86222-1 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Visual acuity improvements after implantation of toric intraocular lenses in cataract patients with astigmatism: a systematic review

BMC Ophthalmology ◽

10.1186/1471-2415-12-41 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 12 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 36

Author(s):

Blaise Agresta ◽

Michael C Knorz ◽

Christina Donatti ◽

Daniel Jackson

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Visual Acuity ◽

Intraocular Lenses ◽

Cataract Patients

Download Full-text

Comparison of visual performance between monofocal and multifocal intraocular lenses of the same material and basic design

Scientific Reports ◽

10.1038/s41598-020-72473-x ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Hirotaka Tanabe ◽

Hitoshi Tabuchi ◽

Tomohiro Shojo ◽

Tomofusa Yamauchi ◽

Kosuke Takase

Keyword(s):

Visual Acuity ◽

Contrast Sensitivity ◽

Wald Test ◽

Intraocular Lenses ◽

Visual Performance ◽

Basic Design ◽

Night Time ◽

Multifocal Iol ◽

Multifocal Intraocular Lenses ◽

Near Visual Acuity

Abstract To compare the visual performance of a monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) (ZCB00) and a multifocal IOL (ZMB00) of the same material and basic design, we evaluated postoperative parameters at 10 weeks after the last surgery in cataract patients who underwent bilateral ZCB00 or ZMB00 implantation from December 13, 2010, to July 29, 2019, with the right and left lenses implanted within 3 months of each other. The study enrolled 2,230 eyes of 1,115 patients. The monofocal group comprised 904 eyes of 452 patients (72.3 ± 6.8 years; females/males, 268/184), and the multifocal group comprised 1,326 eyes of 663 patients (67.0 ± 7.8 years; females/males, 518/145). Contrast sensitivity (4.0/2.5/1.6/1.0/0.7 degrees), contrast sensitivity with glare (1.6/1.0/0.7 degrees), and the VFQ-25 score for driving at night were significantly better in the monofocal group (p < 0.00068, Wald test). Uncorrected intermediate/near visual acuity and near spectacle independence were significantly better in the multifocal group (p < 0.00068, Wald test). The two IOL groups had different characteristics in terms of contrast sensitivity, night-time driving, uncorrected intermediate/near visual acuity and near spectacle independence.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Visual Performance between Refractive and Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

10.21203/rs.2.14898/v1 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Lingying Ye ◽

Tianyu Chen ◽

Zhixiang Hu ◽

Qiudong Su ◽

Jin Li

Keyword(s):

Visual Acuity ◽

Life Quality ◽

Optical Quality ◽

Intraocular Lenses ◽

Visual Performance ◽

Distance Visual Acuity ◽

Multifocal Intraocular Lenses ◽

Good Visual Acuity ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Near Visual Acuity

Abstract AIM To compare the visual performance of asymmetric refractive multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs) with all optic zone diffractive MIOLs.METHODS A prospective study. Patients underwent phacoemulsification were divided into two groups according to the type of MIOLs: 25 patients were implanted with asymmetric refractive MIOLs and 25 patients with all optic zone diffractive MIOLs. Visual acuity, refraction, defocus curves, objective optical quality and the questionnaire of life quality were measured 3 months after surgery.RESULTS There was no significant difference between two groups in uncorrected distance visual acuity、uncorrected near visual acuity、best corrected distance visual acuity or distance corrected near visual acuity. However, the uncorrected intermediate visual acuity was 0.24±0.10 in refractive group and 0.31±0.13 in diffractive group (P<0.05); the distance corrected intermediate visual acuity was 0.22±0.09 in refractive group and 0.31±0.14 in diffractive group (P<0.05). Defocus curves showed two crests in both groups. However, the curve between two crests of refractive group was smoother than diffractive group. The Modulated transfer function cut-off frequency was (22.74±12.29)c/d in refractive group and(30.50±10.04)c/d in diffractive group (P<0.05); the OQAS values 100% (OV100%) were 0.75±0.41 in refractive group and 1.02±0.34 in diffractive group(P<0.05),OV20% were 0.52±0.34 in refractive group and 0.71±0.25 in diffractive group (P<0.05).There was no significant difference between two groups at overall satisfaction, independence spectacles ratio or visual interference phenomenon.CONCLUSIONS Both MIOLs achieve good visual acuity at distance and near. The asymmetric refractive MIOLs show better intermediate visual acuity, and the all optic zone diffractive MIOLs appear to have better objective visual quality.

Download Full-text

One-year clinical evaluation of rotationally asymmetric multifocal intraocular lens with +1.5 diopters near addition

Scientific Reports ◽

10.1038/s41598-019-49524-z ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Tetsuro Oshika ◽

Hiroyuki Arai ◽

Yoshifumi Fujita ◽

Mikio Inamura ◽

Yasushi Inoue ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Visual Acuity ◽

Patient Satisfaction ◽

Contrast Sensitivity ◽

Intraocular Lenses ◽

Phase Iii ◽

Multifocal Intraocular Lenses ◽

Defocus Curve ◽

Near Visual Acuity ◽

One Year ◽

High Level

Abstract We conducted a one-year prospective, multicenter study to assess clinical outcomes after implantation of segmented, rotationally asymmetric multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with +1.5 diopters (D) near addition. In this phase III clinical trial, 120 eyes of 65 patients undergoing phacoemulsification and implantation of Lentis Comfort LS-313 MF15 (Oculentis GmbH) were included. The ophthalmological examinations were performed before and 1 day, 1 week, 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after surgery. Uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuity, uncorrected (UIVA) and distance-corrected (DCIVA) intermediate visual acuity at 70 cm, and uncorrected (UNVA) and distance-corrected (DCNVA) near visual acuity at 30 cm were measured. A defocus curve was obtained and patients were asked about the severity of photic phenomena. Postoperative distance and intermediate visual acuity was excellent, with UDVA, CDVA, UIVA, and DCIVA of approximately 20/20, 20/16, 20/25, 20/25 were attained, respectively. The level of near visual acuity was lower; UNVA and DCNVA remained at around 20/60 and 20/70, respectively. The defocus curve indicated that postoperative uncorrected visual acuity of 20/25 and 20/40 was obtained at as close as 67 cm and 50 cm, respectively. Contrast sensitivity was within the normal range, with a minimal level of subjective symptoms and high patient satisfaction. The rotationally asymmetric multifocal IOLs with +1.5 D near addition provided excellent distance and intermediate vision, but near vision was not enough for reading small prints. Contrast sensitivity was high, with very low incidences of photic phenomena and a high level of patient satisfaction.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Visual Performance between Refractive and Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

10.21203/rs.2.14898/v2 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Lingying Ye ◽

Tianyu Chen ◽

Zhixiang Hu ◽

Qiuwen Yang ◽

Qiudong Su ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Visual Acuity ◽

Optical Quality ◽

Intraocular Lenses ◽

Visual Performance ◽

Interference Phenomenon ◽

Distance Visual Acuity ◽

Multifocal Intraocular Lenses ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Near Visual Acuity ◽

Two Peaks

Abstract BACKGROUND: To compare the visual performance of asymmetric refractive multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs) with all optic zone diffractive MIOLs. METHODS: A prospective study. Patients underwent phacoemulsification were divided into two groups according to the type of MIOLs: 25 patients were implanted with asymmetric refractive MIOLs and 25 patients with all optic zone diffractive MIOLs. Visual acuity, refraction, defocus curves, objective optical quality and the questionnaire of life quality were measured 3 months after surgery. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between two groups in uncorrected distance visual acuity、uncorrected near visual acuity、best corrected distance visual acuity or distance corrected near visual acuity. However, the uncorrected intermediate visual acuity was 0.24±0.10 in refractive group and 0.31±0.13 in diffractive group (P<0.05); the distance corrected intermediate visual acuity was 0.22±0.09 in refractive group and 0.31±0.14 in diffractive group (P<0.05). Defocus curves showed two peaks of maximum vision in both groups. However, the curve between two peaks of refractive group was smoother than diffractive group. The Modulated transfer function cut-off frequency was （22.74±12.29）c/d in refractive group and（30.50±10.04）c/d in diffractive group (P<0.05); the OQAS values 100% (OV100%) were 0.75±0.41 in refractive group and 1.02±0.34 in diffractive group（P<0.05），OV20% were 0.52±0.34 in refractive group and 0.71±0.25 in diffractive group （P<0.05）.There was no significant difference between two groups at overall satisfaction, independence spectacles ratio or visual interference phenomenon. CONCLUSIONS: Both MIOLs achieve good visual acuity at distance and near. The asymmetric refractive MIOLs show better intermediate visual acuity, and the all optic zone diffractive MIOLs appear to have better objective visual quality.

Download Full-text

Evaluation of Different Power of Near Addition in Two Different Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

Journal of Ophthalmology ◽

10.1155/2016/1395302 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 2016 ◽

pp. 1-4 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Ugur Unsal ◽

Gonen Baser

Keyword(s):

Visual Acuity ◽

Intraocular Lens ◽

Intraocular Lenses ◽

Near Vision ◽

Distance Visual Acuity ◽

Multifocal Intraocular Lenses ◽

Uncorrected Distance Visual Acuity ◽

Quality Of Vision ◽

Corrected Distance Visual Acuity ◽

Near Visual Acuity

Purpose.To compare near, intermediate, and distance vision and quality of vision, when refractive rotational multifocal intraocular lenses with 3.0 diopters or diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses with 2.5 diopters near addition are implanted.Methods.41 eyes of 41 patients in whom rotational +3.0 diopters near addition IOLs were implanted and 30 eyes of 30 patients in whom diffractive +2.5 diopters near addition IOLs were implanted after cataract surgery were reviewed. Uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity, intermediate visual acuity, near visual acuity, and patient satisfaction were evaluated 6 months later.Results. The corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity were the same between both groups (p=0.50andp=0.509, resp.). The uncorrected intermediate and corrected intermediate and near vision acuities were better in the +2.5 near vision added intraocular lens implanted group (p=0.049,p=0.005, andp=0.001, resp.) and the uncorrected near vision acuity was better in the +3.0 near vision added intraocular lens implanted group (p=0.001). The patient satisfactions of both groups were similar.Conclusion. The +2.5 diopters near addition could be a better choice in younger patients with more distance and intermediate visual requirements (driving, outdoor activities), whereas the + 3.0 diopters should be considered for patients with more near vision correction (reading).

Download Full-text