Comparison Between an Intraocular Lens With Extended Depth of Focus (Tecnis Symfony ZXR00) and a New Monofocal Intraocular Lens With Enhanced Intermediate Vision (Tecnis Eyhance ICB00)

Comparative Analysis of Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes of a New Enhanced Monofocal IOL and a Conventional Monofocal IOL

Purpose

To compare the outcomes of the Tecnis Eyhance ICB00 IOL, designed to enhance intermediate vision, to a conventional Tecnis Monofocal ZCB00 IOL.

Methods

This retrospective analysis compared two cohorts of patients undergoing lens replacement surgery with bilateral implantation of the Tecnis ICB00 or the Tecnis ZCB00 IOL (383 patients in each group). Monocular and binocular uncorrected distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA; 66cm), and near (UNVA; 40cm) visual acuities, refractive predictability, and patient-reported outcomes were compared. A sub-analysis of patients with the Eyhance IOL was performed to compare patients who achieved bilateral emmetropia to those with mini-monovision. One-month postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

Results

Both groups had comparable UDVA outcomes. On average, both monocular and binocular UIVAs were approximately one Snellen line better in patients implanted with Eyhance IOL (monocular UIVA: ICB00 0.23 ± 0.18 logMAR, ZCB00 0.33 ± 0.19 logMAR; binocular UIVA: ICB00 0.18 ± 0.18 logMAR, ZCB00 0.26 ± 0.20 logMAR, p < 0.01). Likewise, the mean UNVA was also one Snellen line better with the ICB00 model (monocular UNVA: ICB00 0.51 ± 0.20 logMAR, ZCB00 0.61 ± 0.18 logMAR; binocular UNVA: ICB00 0.42 ± 0.19 logMAR, ZCB00 0.51 ± 0.22 logMAR, p < 0.01). There was no difference between the two groups in overall satisfaction or visual phenomena. A subgroup of patients who achieved mini-monovision with Eyhance IOL had, on average, one Snellen line better UIVA and UNVA compared to patients with bilateral emmetropia.

Conclusion

Patients receiving the enhanced monofocal IOL had better intermediate and near vision compared to those receiving the conventional monofocal IOL, with similar levels of patient-reported photic phenomena in both groups.

Extended depth of focus IOL in eyes with different axial myopia and targeted refraction

AIM

To evaluate the objective visual outcomes following implantation of extended depth of focus intraocular lens (EDOF IOL) in individuals with varying axial lengths (AL) and targeted refraction.

METHODS

This retrospective study comprised age-matched eyes that underwent implantation of the EDOF IOL. Eyes were categorized based on AL into groups: control group with AL < 26 mm; high myopia group with AL ≥ 26 mm. Each group was then subdivided based on postoperative spherical equivalent (SE). Follow-up at three months included assessment of uncorrected visual acuity at different distances, contrast sensitivity (CS), refractive outcomes, and spectacle independence.

RESULTS

Overall, this study included 100 eyes from 100 patients, comprising 50 males (50.00%) and 50 females (50.00%), with 20 eyes in each group. In the control group, the uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) at 5 and 3 m (m) in the - 1.50 to -0.75 group was inferior to that of the - 0.75 to 0.00 group (P = 0.004). Conversely, the uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) at 33 cm in the - 1.50 to -0.75 group was superior to that of the - 0.75 to 0.00 group (P = 0.005). Within the high myopia group, the UDVA at 5 and 3 m in the - 2.25 to -1.50 group was worse than in the - 0.75 to 0.00 group (P = 0.009 and 0.008, respectively). However, the UNVA at 33 cm in the - 2.25 to -1.50 group was better than in the - 0.75 to 0.00 group (P = 0.020). No significant differences were observed among the groups for corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) (P > 0.05). Additionally, in the high myopia group, the CS of the - 2.25 to -1.50 group was lower compared to that of the - 0.75 to 0.00 group (P = 0.017). Among high myopia patients, 90.00% with refraction ranging from - 1.50 to -0.75 reported achieving overall spectacle independence.

CONCLUSIONS

Implantation of extended depth of focus intraocular lenses (IOLs) yields satisfactory visual and refractive outcomes in eyes with axial myopia. Among high myopia patients, a refraction ranging from - 1.50 to -0.75 diopters achieves superior visual quality compared to other postoperative myopic diopters.

Comparison of visual outcomes of bilateral dual-technology diffractive intraocular lens vs blended enhanced monofocal with dual-technology intraocular lens

PURPOSE

To compare clinical outcomes after implantation of TECNIS Synergy (ZFR00V) intraocular lenses (IOLs) in both eyes and implantation of the TECNIS Synergy and TECNIS Eyhance (ICB00) combination in patients undergoing cataract surgery.

SETTING

Department of Cataract, Hospital Oftalmológico de Brasilia (HOB), Brasília, Brazil.

DESIGN

Prospective, interventional, randomized, parallel-group study.

METHODS

Patients were categorized into 2 groups: Group 1: ZFR00V IOL was implanted in both eyes. Group 2: An ICB00 IOL was implanted in the dominant eye, and a ZFR00V IOL was implanted in the nondominant eye.

RESULTS

Visual acuity was similar between the 2 groups (95% CI <0.1 logMAR). A superior visual acuity of ≥ 20/25 (at -2.00 to -2.50 diopters [D]) was achieved in Group 1 (bilateral ZFR00V) than in Group 2 (combination of ZFR00V/ICB00). The binocular defocus curve demonstrated better visual acuity at 40 cm (-2.00 D) and 50 cm (-2.50 D) in Group 1 than in Group 2 ( P < .05). Similar contrast sensitivity values were observed between the 2 groups. Patients in Group 1 reported higher satisfaction (completely satisfied) than those in Group 2 ( P < .05). However, halos and glare were more pronounced in Group 1 than in Group 2 ( P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both presbyopia-correcting IOL combinations showed similar binocular visual acuity results. Group 1 demonstrated enhanced visual acuity in the defocus curve at 40 cm (-2.00 D) and 50 cm (-2.50 D). Comparable contrast sensitivity outcomes were observed in both groups. Patients were more completely satisfied in Group 1 than in Group 2, despite the higher frequency of postoperative nighttime halos and glare.

Comparison of Distance-Based Uncorrected Visual Acuity Based on the Optical Profile of Same Platform IOLs

Purpose

To compare and evaluate uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) from far to near distance for four different optical designs of intraocular lenses (IOLs), developed on the same IOL platform.

Patients and Methods

In a cohort of 121 patients, who underwent uncomplicated cataract surgery in Zengyo Suzuki Eye Clinic, Japan, between June 2018 and November 2023, and who received a single-piece TECNIS OptiBlue™ platform series IOL, the following four groups were established based on the IOL implant type: ZCB00V (TE), ZXR00V (SF), DFR00V (SG), and DIB00V (EH). UCVA at 5 m, 1 m, 70 cm, 50 cm, 40 cm, and 30 cm, as well as contrast sensitivity (with and without glare), was compared at one month post-operation.

Results

Regarding diffractive IOLs, patients in the SG group demonstrated significantly improved visual acuity at 5 m, 50 cm, 40 cm, and 30 cm, while those in SF group performed significantly better at 1 m. Among non-diffractive IOLs, patients in the EH group demonstrated significantly improved visual acuity scores at 1 m, 70 cm, 40 cm, and 30 cm, compared to individuals in the TE group, with comparable results between the two groups at 5 m and 50 cm. Patients in the SF and EH groups achieved similar results for visual acuity and contrast sensitivity, while those in the SG group exhibited a distinctive decrease in contrast sensitivity (with glare) relative to the other three groups.

Conclusion

DFR00V seemingly provides excellent UCVA from near to far distances, aiming for spectacle independence, although at the potential cost of decreased contrast sensitivity compared to the other three IOL types. Furthermore, although ZXR00V and DIB00V differ lens structures, they may nonetheless provide similar visual quality and spectacle independence in daily life.

Clinical outcomes after implantation of a new monofocal intraocular lens with enhanced intermediate function in patients with preperimetric glaucoma

Purpose

We evaluated the clinical outcomes after implantation of a new monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) with enhanced intermediate function in patients with preperimetric glaucoma and compared those with patients without retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) defects.

Methods

All patients were implanted bilaterally a new monofocal IOL with enhanced intermediate function. Patients with bilateral RNFL defects and no glaucomatous visual field defects were classified as the preperimetric glaucoma group. A total of 60 eyes of 30 patients with preperimetric glaucoma were compared with 60 eyes of 30 patients without RNFL defects. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), defocus curve, contrast sensitivity, and questionnaire were evaluated 1 month and 3 months after surgery.

Results

No difference in binocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA was evident between the two groups at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. Additionally, there were no significant differences between the two groups regarding the proportion of severe or very severe photic phenomena, such as glare and halos, or the overall satisfaction.

Conclusion

Bilateral implantation of a new monofocal IOL with enhanced intermediate function in patients with preperimetric glaucoma demonstrated commensurate clinical outcomes and could be considered a feasible alternative.

Unilateral intraindividual comparison and bilateral performance of a monofocal spherical and diffractive extended depth of field intraocular lens mix-and-match approach

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the intraindividual visual performance of a spherical and extended depth of field (EDOF) IOL used in a mix-and-match approach.

METHODS

Single centre (tertiary care centre), retrospective consecutive case series. Included patients had uneventful cataract surgery with implantation of a spherical monofocal IOL (CT Spheris 204) in the dominant eye and a diffractive EDOF IOL (AT LARA 829) in the non-dominant eye. Monocular and binocular defocus curves and visual acuity at various distances were assessed. In addition, binocular reading speed, contrast sensitivity, and patient satisfaction using QOV, Catquest 9SF, and glare/halo questionnaires are reported.

RESULTS

A total of 29 patients (58 eyes) were included. We observed significant intra-individual differences for monocular DCIVA, DCNVA, UIVA, and UNVA. There were no differences in monocular BCDVA or UDVA. The monocular defocus curves for the two IOLs significantly differed at defocus steps between -1.0 and -3.5 D. 93.10% of patients reported they would opt for the same combination of IOLs.

CONCLUSION

Excellent uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity was demonstrated in both groups. The mix-and-match approach described in this study yielded good intermediate vision and improved near vision with high-patient satisfaction.

Clinical Results and Factors Affecting Visual Function in Eyes Implanted with an Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lens

Purpose

To compare the clinical results achieved with the enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with those of the monofocal IOL and investigate factors affecting the distance, intermediate, and near vision.

Patients and Methods

Patients were included who underwent bilateral consecutive cataract surgeries using the same IOLs with follow-up to 1 month postoperatively. Refractions, monocular UDVA and CDVA, and binocular distance-corrected functional visual acuity at 5 meters (BDCFVA), at 66 centimeters (BDCIFVA) and at 40 centimeters (DCNVA) were assessed. Multiple regression analysis was used to assess the factors affecting binocular BDCFVA, BDCIFVA, and BDCNFVA. Subjective symptoms were assessed using the Near Activity Visual Questionnaire (NAVQ) and visual analogue scale (VAS).

Results

Sixty patients (120 eyes) implanted with the Tecnis Eyhance IOL (30 patients, 60 eyes) or the Tecnis monofocal IOL (30 patients, 60 eyes) were included. The Tecnis Eyhance IOL provided significantly better binocular BDCIFVA than the Tecnis monofocal IOL in patients under 70 years of age. Multiple regression analysis showed that age was the only factor affecting distance and intermediate visual function in eyes with the Tecnis Eyhance IOL; gender, pupillary diameter, axial length, and average keratometry were not significant. There were no significant differences in subjective symptoms.

Conclusion

The comprehensive cohort analysis did not confirm the advantage on the intermediate vision of the Tecnis Eyhance IOL. Younger age may be an important factor to benefit from the unique optical characteristics of this IOL.

Vehicle Headlight Halo Simulation of Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses

Purpose

This optical bench study was designed to evaluate and compare the halos generated by presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (PCIOLs) and monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs), with or without lens decentration, using an optical bench to simulate the headlight of a distant vehicle in mesopic conditions.

Methods

Halos generated by six nondiffractive and 10 diffractive IOLs with different dioptric add powers were evaluated using a high dynamic range bench system. Halo intensities were compared by assessing the area under the measured intensity profile curve to compute the relative halo magnitude (RHM).

Results

Nondiffractive PCIOLs produced smaller and less intense bench halo images than diffractive ones. RHM measurements ranged from 964 to 1896. Monofocal IOLs produced lower RHM values, whereas diffractive PCIOLs generated higher ones. When decentered by 0.5 mm with respect to the system aperture, more obviously asymmetric halo image profiles were observed in diffractive compared with nondiffractive PCIOLs.

Conclusions

Simulated bench halos of nondiffractive PCIOLs are smaller and less intense than those of diffractive PCIOLs. Additional clinical studies assessing standardized patient-reported outcomes measures are required to correlate these bench results with patient satisfaction.

Translational Relevance

This study contrasts the design-related simulated bench halos of nondiffractive and diffractive PCIOLs, aiming to elucidate their impact on halo perception.

Analysis of higher-order aberrations in relation to the clinical outcome of an enhanced monofocal IOL

PURPOSE

To analyse higher-order aberrations of an enhanced monofocal aspheric intraocular lens (IOL) in relation to the clinical outcome compared to a monofocal aspheric IOL.

SETTING

Department of Ophthalmology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany.

DESIGN

Prospective, monocentric, controlled, non-randomized, two-armed study.

METHODS

After phacoemulsification, a total of 30 patients (60 eyes) were bilaterally implanted with either TECNIS Eyhance IOL model ICB00 (Johnson & Johnson Surgical Vision, Inc.) or TECNIS Monofocal 1-Piece IOL model ZCB00 (Johnson & Johnson Surgical Vision, Inc.) in 30 eyes each. Assessments were performed 1 and 3 months after surgery including refraction, uncorrected and best-corrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuity, defocus curves, contrast sensitivities under photopic, mesopic and mesopic conditions with glare, higher-order aberrations (HOAs) at pupil sizes of 5, 4, 3 and 2 mm and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

At 3-month follow-up, measurements of HOAs revealed significant higher negative internal and ocular primary spherical aberrations in the ICB00 group at pupil sizes of 5, 4, 3 and 2 mm. The ICB00 showed significant better results in intermediate and near visual acuity, but no difference in distance visual acuity. No significant difference was found in contrast sensitivities at any condition or spatial frequency. Spectacle independence was significant better without significant higher rates of dysphotopsia in the ICB00 group.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher negative spherical aberrations in the ICB00 group at all measured pupil sizes appear to lead to a superior clinical outcome in intermediate and near vision compared to the ZCB00 group without compromising contrast sensitivity or distance visual acuity.

Comparison of cataract patients with regular corneal astigmatism after implantation of extended range-of-vision and bifocal toric intraocular lenses

Purpose

To compare the postoperative visual acuity and visual quality between extended range-of-vision and multifocal toric intraocular lens (IOLs) after implantation in cataract patients with regular corneal astigmatism.

Setting

Department of Ophthalmology, the Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin Province, China.

Design

Retrospective and single-center study.

Methods

The study involved implanting the Tecnis Symphony (ZXR00IOL) or the bifocal toric (ZMTIOL) in patients undergoing cataract surgery. Three months after surgery, lens performance was evaluated using distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity tests, defocus curves, the modulation transfer function (MTF), a visual function index questionnaire (VF-14), and the adverse optical interference phenomena.

Results

The 3-month postoperative follow-up found that both groups had good corrected distance vision. The ZMT group had better-uncorrected distance visual acuity and near visual acuity (p < 0.05). However, the ZXR group showed better uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (p < 0.05) and visual continuity. Overall astigmatism in the postoperative ZMT group was significantly lower than that in the pre-operative group (p < 0.05). The ZMT group had lower total high-order aberrations (tHOs), higher MTF values, and higher VF-14 scores (p < 0.05). Finally, the ZXR group exhibited reduced halo and glare phenomena (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

We found that ZMT can effectively correct a corneal astigmatism of 1.0-1.5 D and ZXR can improve patient outcomes regarding subjective optical quality and range of vision. These findings have the potential to improve future astigmatism treatment options.

Visual satisfaction and spectacle independence with monofocal intraocular lens with enhanced intermediate vision and trifocal intraocular lenses in the prepresbyopic age group patients with cataracts

AIM

This aims to study visual satisfaction and spectacle independence in prepresbyopic age patients with cataracts after the implantation of either monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) with enhanced intermediate vision or trifocal IOL.

SETTING

Private practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective, observational case study was conducted on patients in the prepresbyopic age group with cataracts. Patients were allocated to one of the two groups. Thirteen patients (26 eyes) received monofocal IOL with enhanced intermediate vision (intermediate vision group), and 12 patients (24 eyes) received diffractive multifocal IOLs (trifocal group). Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity, Uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) and uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) values, defocus curves, and contrast sensitivities (CS) of the two groups were compared 3 months' postsurgery. Their spectacle independence and visual satisfaction were also assessed.

RESULTS

The study patients were aged 35-45 years and comprised 14 males and 11 females. No significant difference was observed in UDVA (intermediate vision group: 0.02 ± 0.01, trifocal group: 0.02 ± 0.01; P = 0.22) and UIVA (intermediate vision group: 0.20 ± 0.10, trifocal group: 0.19 ± 0.10; P = 0.12). However, a statistically significant difference was observed between the groups in terms of UNVA (intermediate vision group: 0.32 ± 0.10, trifocal group: 0.80 ± 0.10; P = 0.01). The mean CS in monofocal IOL with enhanced intermediate vision and trifocal groups were 1.577 ± 0.3 and 1.550 ± 0.2, respectively (P = 0.40). None of the patients experienced photic phenomena. In total, 10 of 13 patients in the monofocal IOL with enhanced intermediate vision group required spectacle correction for near visual acuity in the range of +1.00 to +2.00 D.

CONCLUSION

This study found that there was no significant difference in distance and intermediate vision between the two groups. However, the trifocal group had better uncorrected near vision compared to the monofocal group that had enhanced intermediate vision. The conclusion is that using trifocal IOLs for both eyes provided complete independence from wearing glasses. In addition, no visual disturbances were observed after implanting the new-generation trifocal IOLs.

Clinical outcomes with an aspheric monofocal and a new enhanced monofocal intraocular lens with modified optical profile

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes obtained after cataract surgery with an aspheric monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) and an enhanced IOL with a modified optical profile.

METHODS

Randomised clinical trial enrolling 70 patients (age, 52-87 years) undergoing cataract surgery. Two groups were created according to the type of IOL implanted: Vivinex iSert from Hoya Surgical Optics (Vivinex group, 35 patients) and Tecnis Eyhance ICB00 from Johnson & Johnson Vision (Eyhance group, 35 patients). Uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected (UIVA) and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA), refraction, and self-perceived visual function (Catquest-9SF) were evaluated during a 3-month follow-up.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between IOL groups in UDVA and CDVA (p ≥ 0.093). In contrast, monocular and binocular UIVA and DCIVA were significantly better in the Eyhance group at 1 (p ≤ 0.015) and 3 months postoperatively (p ≤ 0.002). Postoperative DCIVA 20/25 or better was obtained in 71.4% and 20.0% of patients in Eyhance and Vivinex groups, respectively. Differences in postoperative Rasch calibrated Catquest scores between Eyhance and Vivinex groups did not reach statistical significance (p ≥ 0.102). However, significant correlations were only found between the change in UIVA and Catquest scores (0.364 ≤ r ≤ 0.444, p ≤ 0.041) in the Eyhance group.

CONCLUSIONS

The modified monofocal IOL evaluated provides better intermediate visual function in comparison with a standard aspheric monofocal IOL, but the impact of this benefit on the self-perceived level of vision achieved after surgery according to the patient seemed to be limited.

Analysis of Wavefront Data Obtained With a Pyramidal Sensor in Pseudophakic Eyes Implanted With Diffractive Intraocular Lenses

PURPOSE

To investigate the clinical validity of using wavefront measurements obtained with a recently available pyramidal aberrometer to assess the optical quality of eyes implanted with diffractive intraocular lenses (IOLs).

METHODS

Individual biometric data were used to create models of pseudophakic eyes implanted with two diffractive IOLs. Their synthetic wavefronts were calculated by ray-tracing with near infrared wavelength (0.85 μm). Comparisons of the through-focus visual acuity of 12 pseudophakic eyes were obtained with three different methods: clinical defocus curves; simulated defocus curves calculated from ray-tracing in the customized model eyes; and through-focus simulated defocus curves calculated from the wavefront data measured with a pyramidal aberrometer.

RESULTS

Image quality calculated from wavefront data obtained by ray-tracing with 0.85 μm wavelength, without scaling the phase to 0.55 μm, resulted in a significantly different through-focus curve compared to the reference values. Even so, after scaling of the wavefront data to 0.55 μm, the defocus curves calculated from the wavefronts measured with the pyramidal aberrometer did not match the shape and the depth of field of the clinical defocus curves or the theoretical expected values.

CONCLUSIONS

Correcting for the longitudinal chromatic aberration of the eye when measuring the wavefront of eyes implanted with diffractive IOLs under near infrared light only accounts for the best focus shift due to the longitudinal chromatic aberration, but not for the wavelength dependence of the diffractive element. The pyramidal sensor does not seem to properly sample the slopes of a wavefront measured from a pseudophakic eye implanted with a presbyopia-correcting diffractive IOL to a clinically acceptable level. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(7):438-444.].

Rotational stability of a new toric intraocular lens with an advanced optical profile

PURPOSE

To examine the rotational stability of a new toric intraocular lens (IOL), the TECNIS Eyhance Toric II, over a course of 3 months.

SETTING

Vienna Institute for Research in Ocular Surgery, Hanusch Hospital, Vienna, Austria.

DESIGN

Prospective unmasked single-center study.

METHODS

50 eyes of 50 patients with cataract and regular corneal astigmatism ≥0.75 diopters (D) were included. The TECNIS Eyhance Toric II IOL was implanted in 1 eye of each study patient. Images of the alignment axis of the IOL were taken intraoperatively, as well as at 1 hour, 1 week, and 3 months postoperatively. For the measurement of toric IOL rotation, images were superimposed on the basis of ocular landmarks. Uncorrected and corrected distance (4 m) and intermediate (66 cm) visual acuities were assessed at the 3-month visit.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the rotational position between the intraoperative and 3 month timepoints, with a mean rotation of 1.34 ± 1.46 degrees, in 27 examined eyes. ( P = 0.313). No patients had to undergo repositioning of the toric IOL. A significant reduction of refractive cylinder occurred from preoperatively 1.8 ± 1.1 to 0.40 ± 0.42 D at the 3-month visit ( P = .001; n = 43). The corrected distance visual acuity improved significantly from 0.28 ± 0.16 logMAR preoperatively to -0.01 ± 0.13 logMAR at 3 months postoperatively ( P = .001; n = 43).

CONCLUSIONS

The TECNIS Eyhance Toric II showed a good visual performance with no significant rotation over a course of 3 months and, therefore, an excellent rotational stability. The intraocular lens showed a good safety profile with no adverse events.

Pitfalls of Using NIR-Based Clinical Instruments to Test Eyes Implanted with Diffractive Intraocular Lenses

The strong wavelength dependency of diffractive elements casts reasonable doubts on the reliability of near-infrared- (NIR)-based clinical instruments, such as aberrometers and double-pass systems, for assessing, post-surgery, the visual quality of eyes implanted with diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (DMIOLs). The results obtained for such patients when using NIR light can be misleading. Ordinary compensation for the refractive error bound to chromatic aberration is not enough because it only considers the best focus shift but does not take into account the distribution of light energy among the foci which strongly depends on the wavelength-dependent energy efficiency of the diffractive orders used in the DMIOL design. In this paper, we consider three commercial DMIOL designs with the far focus falling within the range of (−1, 0, +1)-diffractive orders. We prove theoretically the differences existing in the physical performance of the studied lenses when using either the design wavelength in the visible spectrum or a NIR wavelength (780 to 850 nm). Based on numerical simulation and on-bench experimental results, we show that such differences cannot be neglected and may affect all the foci of a DMIOL, including the far focus.

Positioning of enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses between conventional monofocal and extended depth of focus lenses: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

New intraocular lenses (IOLs) have emerged since the originally coined monofocal and multifocal IOLs. The extended depth of focus (EDoF) and enhanced monofocal IOLs (mono-EDoF) that have appeared in the last decade have caused some confusion in their classification. The aim of this review was to summarize the outcomes provided by mono-EDOF IOLs and to determine which of the endpoints, described by the American National Standard (ANSI) for EDoF IOLs, are fulfilled.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and WEB OF SCIENCE databases were searched. Two independent reviewers screened the studies for inclusion and data extraction. The search strategy was limited to studies published between 2020 and 2022, but not by language. The results are presented as a narrative summary accompanied by tables, in alignment with the objectives of this scoping review. Compliance with the endpoints for clinical outcomes described in the American National Standard Z80.35-2018 (ANSI) for EDoF lenses was checked and additional endpoints were defined.

RESULTS

Two systematic reviews, 13 laboratory, 21 clinical, and two mixed studies were included. Tecnis Eyhance was the mono-EDOF with the highest volume of evidence to date. Although laboratory studies included other IOLs, clinical evidence for them is still scarce, with only one study of IsoPure compared to a standard monofocal IOL. Evidence in comparison to EDoF lenses is also scarce, even for Tecnis Eyhance, with only three studies including this lens in comparison to an EDoF lens. After evaluation of the ANSI criteria, agreement was found in the failure for the increase in depth of field equal to or greater than 0.5 D for a visual acuity (VA) level of 0.2 logMAR and none of the studies supported that the median monocular VA at intermediate distance was at least 0.2 logMAR.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional clinical evidence is required for other mono-EDOF IOLs beyond Tecnis Eyhance. Until the arrival of a standard classification, mono-EDOF should be better still classified as monofocal because the ANSI standards were not fully met.

Visual outcomes of non-diffractive extended-depth-of-focus and enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses: A case-control study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the visual outcomes of a non-diffractive extended-depth-of-focus (EDoF) intraocular lens (IOL) with an enhanced monofocal IOL.

METHODS

We evaluated 76 eyes from 38 patients who had undergone bilateral cataract surgery with implantation of either an EDoF IOL (AcrySof IQ Vivity, n = 40 eyes) or an enhanced monofocal IOL (Tecnis Eyhance, n = 36 eyes). Objective refraction, monocular and binocular uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA, CDVA), uncorrected and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA, DCIVA), uncorrected and distance-corrected near visual acuity (UNVA, DCNVA), binocular defocus curves, contrast sensitivity, halo and glare perception, and spectacle independence were compared.

RESULTS

Monocular and binocular UDVA, CDVA, UIVA, and DCIVA were comparable in both groups, whereas UNVA and DCNVA were significantly better with the Vivity group than with the Eyhance group. The two groups had no statistically significant difference regarding photopic and scotopic contrast sensitivities or halo and glare perception. Compared to the Eyhance IOL, the Vivity IOL had a larger landing zone in the defocus curve and provided higher spectacle independence for near vision.

CONCLUSION

Both the AcrySof IQ Vivity and Tecnis Eyhance IOLs had excellent distant and intermediate visual acuity, while the former had more satisfactory near vision outcomes with greater spectacle independence rate. No differences were obtained between two IOLs in terms of patient satisfaction and visual disturbances such as halo and glare.

Real world outcomes of the new Tecnis Eyhance IOL

PURPOSE

To compare the performance of Tecnis Eyhance ICB00 with Tecnis PCB00 IOL for far, intermediate, and near vision, in patients after bilateral cataract surgery.

SETTINGS

This study was done at Geneva University Hospitals.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective study of 224 eyes that underwent cataract between May 2019 and June 2020.

METHODS

Visual acuity was assessed from month 1 to 12 after surgery for distance, intermediate and near visual acuity, by the same optometrist, which was blind regarding the type of IOL. The patients answered to a quality of life questionnaire. Patients were excluded for: monocular surgery, macular disease, other IOL type, or inability to reach 20/20 visual acuity in both eyes without correction.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-two eyes were excluded. Three groups were then analyzed: PCB00 group (38 eyes), ICB00 group (22 eyes), and mismatch group (12 eyes). Monocular visual acuities (CIVA, UNVA and CNVA, in logMAR) were higher in the ICB00 group than the PCB00 group (respectively 0.3 vs 0.4, p = 0.0033; 0.3 vs 0.4, p = 0.0408; 0.3 vs 0.4, p = 0.0039). Binocular visual acuities, CIVA and CNVA were higher in the ICB00 group than the PCB00 group (0.2 vs 0.4, p = 0.0061; 0.15 vs 0.3, p = 0.018). This mirrored the findings of the quality of life questionnaire. There was no significant difference between PCB00 and mismatch groups.

CONCLUSIONS

the Tecnis Eyhance was more effective for intermediate and near vision. The central defocus of the lens might help patients achieve spectacle independence and better quality of life.

A Comparative Study of Two Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses

OBJECTIVE

To assess and compare the visual performance of two extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses (IOLs), Tecnis Symfony (Symfony; Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA) and Acrysof IQ Vivity (Vivity; Alcon Inc, Fort Worth, TX).

METHODS

The medical records of patients undergoing cataract surgery with Symfony or Vivity implantation from May 2021 to September 2021 and the data available for the 3-month follow-up were reviewed. The main measures of the findings were uncorrected and corrected distance (4 m) visual acuity (VA), uncorrected intermediate (66 cm) VA (UIVA) and uncorrected near (40 and 33 cm) VA (UNVA), refractive error (RE), defocus profiles analysis, optical quality parameters, and patient-reported quality of vision questionnaire results.

RESULTS

Of the 40 patients, 19 patients (31 eyes) were treated with the Symfony IOL and 21 (32 eyes) with the Vivity IOL. The mean age of the patients was 63.4±7.8 (range, 40-76) years in the Symfony group and 61.8±9.7 (range, 40-77) years in the Vivity group. There was no meaningful difference between the two groups in the preoperative parameters, except that the Vivity group had a better CDVA. Among the main measures of results, there was no statistically significant difference, except for the UNVA (33 cm). The Symfony group also showed a smoother defocus curve at 3 months postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding uncorrected/corrected distance VA, UIVA, UNVA (40 cm), RE, optical quality parameters, and patient-reported quality of vision questionnaire results. The Symfony group demonstrated a significantly superior UNVA (33 cm) and a smoother defocus curve with a broad landing zone.

Enhanced Monofocal Versus Conventional Monofocal Intraocular Lens in Cataract Surgery: A Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare different outcomes of an enhanced monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) versus a conventional monofocal IOL implantation after cataract surgery.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guideline was used for abstracting data and assessing quality. Comparative studies between enhanced monofocal versus conventional monofocal IOL implantations reporting outcomes in monocular and binocular visual acuities at various distances, spectacle independence, contrast sensitivity, optical quality, and adverse effects were identified from three databases. Meta-analysis, sensitivity analysis, and subgroup analysis were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 680 eyes implanted with an enhanced monofocal IOL (Tecnis Eyhance ICB00; Johnson & Johnson) and 647 eyes with a conventional monofocal IOL from 3 randomized controlled trials and 9 comparative studies were included. The enhanced monofocal IOL showed better monocular uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) (mean difference [MD]: -0.11 logMAR; 95% CI: -0.12 to -0.09), binocular UIVA (MD: -0.17 logMAR; 95% CI: -0.23 to -0.11), and binocular uncorrected near visual acuity performance (MD: -0.17 logMAR; 95% CI: -0.29 to -0.04) than the conventional monofocal IOL. More patients were spectacle free at intermediate distance with the enhanced monofocal IOL (odds ratio: 12.9; 95% CI: 6.2 to 27.0). Both monocular (MD: -0.002 logMAR; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.01) and binocular (MD: 0.01 logMAR; 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.03) uncorrected distance visual acuity revealed non-significant differences between the IOL designs. Contrast sensitivity, photic phenomenon, and adverse effects were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced monofocal IOLs effectively improved unaided intermediate vision with similar distance performance relative to conventional monofocal IOLs. This was achieved without compromising the contrast sensitivity or inducing photic phenomena. [J Refract Surg. 2022;38(8):538-546.].

Monofocal intraocular lens with enhanced intermediate function as substitute for multifocal intraocular lens in positive dysphotopsia

Purpose

To present a case of a 62-year-old patient implanted with multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) who underwent a bilateral IOL exchange due to positive dysphotopsia. In an attempt to reduce the symptoms and compensate for the loss of multifocality, we implanted an aspheric monofocal IOL with enhanced intermediate function in one eye and a spherical monofocal IOL in the other eye.

Observations

The patient presented with complaints of halo and glare, measured with a simulator, following the implantation of segmented multifocal IOLs two years earlier. The uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was 20/20 in both eyes. Before presentation at our clinic, a laser capsulotomy had been performed on the right eye. We proceeded with a bilateral IOL exchange. Because of capsular insufficiency in the right eye, we implanted a spherical monofocal three-piece IOL in the ciliary sulcus with optic capture. In the left eye, we used a monofocal IOL with an enhanced intermediate function. Two weeks postoperatively, UDVA (monocularly) was 20/20 in OD and OS, the uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) was 20/32, and the uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) was 20/50. Binocularly, UDVA was 20/20, UIVA was 20/25 and UNVA was 20/25. The patient reported a marked decrease in halos and glare.

Conclusions and importance

When planning IOL exchange surgery, in cases of intolerance to multifocal IOLs, the clinician should consider the dilemma of loss of multifocality. Recent developments in monofocal IOL technology present new options to improve visual function in cases of multifocal IOL explantation.

Comparison of visual results and optical quality of two presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses: TECNIS symfony versus TECNIS synergy

PURPOSE

This study compared the extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) (ZXR00; Tecnis® Symfony^®, Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, USA) and a new presbyopia-correcting IOL that combines EDOF and multifocal profiles (ZFR00; Tecnis^® Synergy^®, Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, USA) with the same material.

METHODS

The medical records of patients undergoing cataract surgery with ZXR00 or ZFR00 implantation between March 2021 and July 2021 and with the data available for the 3-month visit were reviewed. The uncorrected near, intermediate, and distance visual acuity (VA), corrected distance VA, defocus curves, refractive errors (RE), optical quality parameters, and patient-reported visual performance parameters were the main outcome measures.

RESULTS

Among the twenty-three enrolled patients, twelve patients (21 eyes) received ZXR00 and nine patients (17 eyes) received ZFR00. The mean age of the patients was 59.6 ± 10.6 (range: 49 to 70) and 65.2 ± 8.2 (range: 45 to 82) years in ZXR00 and ZFR00 groups, respectively, without significant difference. There was not a significant difference between the two groups in terms of baseline parameters and postoperative RE. The ZFR00 group showed markedly superior intermediate and near VA (p < 0.001 for all) at 3 months postoperatively. In terms of optical quality, ZXR00 was significantly better than ZFR00 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both IOLs had comparable distance VA. ZFR00 IOL was superior for intermediate and near visual acuity, but ZXR00 IOL was better for optical quality. Research with more participants is needed to support this finding.