Gundersen KG, Potvin R. Refractive and Visual Outcomes After Implantation of a Secondary Sulcus Intraocular Lens with an Extended Depth of Focus.
Clin Ophthalmol 2022;
16:1861-1869. [PMID:
35711970 PMCID:
PMC9192784 DOI:
10.2147/opth.s366145]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2022] [Accepted: 05/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose
To evaluate the range of vision, visual function, and quality of vision after implantation of a secondary extended depth of focus intraocular lens (EDOF IOL) implanted in the sulcus.
Setting
One clinical practice in Haugesund, Norway.
Design
Prospective single arm non-interventional study.
Methods
Eligible subjects presenting for surgery, or who had previous successful primary cataract or refractive lens exchange surgery in both eyes were subsequently implanted with the AddOn® secondary EDOF IOL in the sulcus. Manifest refraction and visual acuity at distance, intermediate and near were measured 3 months after surgery, along with the monocular defocus curve. Subjects also completed a visual function and a quality of vision questionnaire.
Results
The study included 32 eyes of 16 subjects. At 3 months postoperative, the mean refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) was −0.16 ± 0.30 D, with a residual cylinder of 0.29 ± 0.27 D. The mean monocular uncorrected VA was 0.1 logMAR (20/25) or better at all test distances. The monocular defocus curves showed a depth of focus of 2.0 D. For every category except reading fine print, all but one subject (94%) had no difficulty or little difficulty with near tasks. Glare and halos were the most common visual disturbances, with no reports of starbursts. There was no evidence of any intralenticular opacification in any of the eyes, and no evidence of iris chafing/depigmentation.
Conclusion
This secondary EDOF IOL provided excellent distance and intermediate vision, and very good near vision to subjects. Subject reported near visual function was also very good and visual disturbances were limited. This lens appears to be a good option for patients who would like to improve their range of vision. Results appear as good or better than those reported for primary EDOF lenses.
Collapse