Clinical evaluation of the OptiVis™ multifocal intraocular lens

Clinical Results of Diffractive, Refractive, Hybrid Multifocal, and Monofocal Intraocular Lenses

Purpose

To present the outcomes of hybrid multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and to compare with refractive and diffractive multifocal IOLs (MFIOLs).

Methods

Three hundred twenty eyes (160 patients) underwent cataract surgery with randomized IOLs bilateral implantation. Changes in uncorrected and distance-corrected logMAR distance, intermediate and near (UNVA and DCNVA) visual acuity (VA), contrast sensitivity (CS), presence of dysphotopsia, spectacle independence, and patient satisfaction were analyzed.

Results

Postoperative VA in the hybrid (OptiVis) group was improved in all distances (p < 0.001). OptiVis acted superiorly to monofocal IOLs in UNVA and DCNVA (p < 0.001 for both) and to refractive ones in DCNVA (p < 0.005). Distance, mesopic, without glare CS in OptiVis was lower than in the monofocal group and similar to other MFIOLs. No differences in dysphotopsia pre- and postoperatively and spectacle independence in near for OptiVis and refractive MFIOLs were detected. OptiVis patients were more satisfied than those with monofocal IOLs (p=0.015).

Conclusions

After cataract surgery, patients with OptiVis improved VA in all distances. Near and intermediate VA was better than monofocal, and DCNVA was better than the refractive group. CS was lower in OptiVis than in the monofocal group, but there was no difference between MFIOLs. Patient satisfaction was higher in OptiVis than in the monofocal group. This trial is registered with NCT03512626.

Visual performance after bilateral implantation of a new diffractive aspheric multifocal intraocular lens with a 3.5 D addition

PURPOSE

To evaluate visual performance after implantation of a new diffractive aspheric multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) with a +3.50 D addition power.

METHODS

A total of 24 cataract patients were bilaterally implanted with the Diffractiva-aA MIOL in 2 ophthalmologic centers and followed for 6 months. Postoperative evaluations included visual acuities (VA) at various distances, defocus testing, contrast sensitivity (CS) measurements, and patient satisfaction questionnaire.

RESULTS

Six months postoperatively, binocular uncorrected VA (mean ± SD; logMAR) was 0.00 ± 0.05 (≈ 20/20) for distance, 0.06 ± 0.13 (≈ 20/23) for intermediate (1 m), and 0.00 ± 0.05 (≈ 20/20) for near (40 cm). All patients achieved uncorrected VA of 20/25 or better for distance and near, and 20/40 or better at 1 m. Monocular and binocular defocus curves showed 2 peaks of maximum VA at the distance focus (0.0 D) and the near focus (-2.5 D) and a good range of intermediate vision with the lowest mean acuity being at -1.5 D defocus. Photopic and mesopic CS were within the standard normal range. The majority of patients (n = 22; 91.7%) were spectacle independent; 8.3% (n = 2) reported wearing glasses occasionally for very small print (1 patient) or for watching television (1 patient). Overall, all patients were "very satisfied" (n = 22; 91.7%) or "satisfied" (n = 2; 8.3%) with the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

The new Diffractiva-aA MIOL provided a full range of vision from near to far generating highly satisfied, spectacle independent patients with only minimal visual disturbances at night.