The Effect of Spectacle-Induced Low Myopia in the Non-Dominant Eye on the Binocular Defocus Curve with a Non-Diffractive Extended Vision Intraocular Lens

Non-diffractive, toric, extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses in eyes with low corneal astigmatism

BACKGROUND

To assess clinical outcomes after implanting toric, extended-depth-of-focus intraocular lenses (IOLs) to correct low corneal astigmatism in eyes with cataracts.

METHODS

47 eyes were implanted with the AcrySof IQ Vivity Toric DFT215 IOL. Main outcome measures were refractive error, monocular uncorrected and corrected distance (UDVA/CDVA), uncorrected and distance-corrected intermediate (UIVA/DCIVA), and uncorrected near and distance-corrected near (UNVA/DCNVA) visual acuities, monocular defocus curve, rotational stability, and IOLSAT and QUVID questionnaires. Patients were assessed at 3 months postsurgery.

RESULTS

All eyes had a postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) within ± 0.50 D and 97.87% (n = 46) had a refractive cylinder ≤ 0.50 D. The mean SE and refractive cylinder were - 0.10 ± 0.17 D and - 0.16 ± 0.24 D, respectively. The CDVA was ≥ 20/25 and ≥ 20/32 in 95.74% (n = 45) and 97.87% (n = 46) of eyes, respectively. The DCIVA was ≥ 20/32 in 85.11% (n = 40) of eyes and the DCNVA was ≥ 20/40 in 74.47% (n = 35). The mean values of CDVA, DCIVA, and DCNVA were - 0.02 ± 0.08, 0.14 ± 0.09, and 0.23 ± 0.12 logMAR, respectively. The defocus curve revealed good visual acuity at far and intermediate distances with a depth-of-focus of about 1.75 D. IOL rotation was 0.74 ± 1.13 degrees and all eyes had a rotation of less than 5 degrees. Patients reported either good or very good postoperative vision without eyeglasses under bright-light-conditions at distance (87.80%, 36/41) and intermediate distance (92.68%, 38/41). Between about 63.83%-72.34% (30-34) of patients reported no starburst, halos, or glare, or if experienced, were not bothersome.

CONCLUSIONS

The Vivity toric IOL implanted in eyes with low-astigmatism provides accurate refractive outcomes, good visual acuity at different distances and excellent rotational stability. Trial Registration The study was registered with the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00030579).

Visual outcomes, satisfaction, and spectacle independence with a nondiffractive extended vision intraocular lens targeted for slight monovision

PURPOSE

To evaluate vision, satisfaction, and spectacle independence of the AcrySof IQ Vivity intraocular lens when the nondominant eye is targeted for slight myopia.

SETTING

1 clinical practice in the United States.

DESIGN

Prospective unmasked nonrandomized clinical trial.

METHODS

Patients presenting for cataract surgery interested in reducing their dependence on spectacles were enrolled, with the dominant eye targeted for emmetropia and the nondominant eye targeted for slight monovision (-0.50 diopters [D]). Visual disturbances, satisfaction, and spectacle independence were evaluated. Visual acuity (VA) was tested at distance (4 m), intermediate (66 cm), and near (40 cm) at 3 months postoperatively when uncorrected, with both eyes corrected to emmetropia and with 1 eye adjusted for monovision. 2 binocular defocus curves were also collected under the latter 2 conditions.

RESULTS

Data from 31 patients were analyzed. The mean refractive spherical equivalent was 0.45 D more myopic in the nondominant eye, resulting in worse uncorrected VA at distance but better uncorrected VA at near. The binocular defocus curve with monovision showed significantly better VA from -2.0 to -3.0 D, and patients reported less need for spectacles (and better vision) at near than reported with binocular emmetropia. Glare, blurred vision, and starbursts were the most reported visual disturbances. Although not correlated with the difference in refraction, glare and blurred vision were significantly correlated with overall satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Implanting this IOL with a target of slight myopia in the nondominant eye appears to be a viable way to improve near vision, although with an increased potential for visual disturbances.

Visual Performance of Eyes with Residual Refractive Errors after Implantation of an Extended Vision Intraocular Lens

Background

To analyze the tolerance on distance vision of different combined residual astigmatic situations in patients implanted with a novel wavefront shaping extended depth of focus (EDoF) intraocular lens (IOL).

Methods

The study included patients implanted with the Acrysof® IQ Vivity® IOL. Uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) were measured three months after surgery, considering CDVA as the reference situation of the study. Distance VA was also measured in different refractive situations: (A) with 0.50 diopters (D) of positive (myopization) and negative (hyperopization) defocus and (B) with a residual mixed astigmatic refraction induced by adding a combination of -0.25 D spherical and 0.50 D cylindrical lenses placed in vertical (against the rule-ATR), oblique, and horizontal (with the rule-WTR) positions.

Results

The study included 30 eyes of 30 patients. UDVA and CDVA were -0.04 ± 0.05 and -0.05 ± 0.05 logMAR, respectively. VA values with +0.50 D and -0.50 D of defocus were 0.01 ± 0.06 and 0.00 ± 0.04 logMAR, respectively. VA was better with distance correction (p < 0.001) and no differences were found between the myopic and the hyperopic situations (p=0.09). Distance VA for the ATR, oblique, and WTR astigmatic situations was 0.01 ± 0.05, 0.01 ± 0.06, and 0.01 ± 0.04 logMAR, respectively. VA was better for the reference situation (p < 0.001) and no differences were found among the three astigmatic situations (p=0.21).

Conclusions

Low residual defocus and mixed astigmatic errors, regardless of its orientation, seem to be tolerated by patients implanted with the studied EDoF IOL. This trial is registered with NCT05392998. Registered 26 May 2022-Retrospectively registered.

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.

Patient Satisfaction and Visual Performance in Patients with Ocular Pathology after Bilateral Implantation of a New Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens

Aim

To evaluate visual results and patient-perceived outcomes in patients with ocular pathologies implanted with a new extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens (IOL).

Methods

Patients with ocular pathology undergoing cataract surgery and bilaterally implanted with Vivity® IOLs were evaluated three months after surgery. The control group included patients with no ocular pathologies. Binocular defocus curves, corrected and uncorrected mono- and binocular distance visual acuity (DVA), and binocular contrast sensitivity were measured. Patients completed the Catquest-9SF questionnaire and reported on dysphotopsia and their need for spectacle-correction.

Results

Twenty-five patients were included in each group. Monocular uncorrected DVA was better in the control group (-0.01 ± 0.07) compared with the study group (0.03 ± 0.08), p=0.027. There were no other statistically significant differences in DVA, with an uncorrected binocular acuity of -0.06 ± 0.06 for the control group and -0.05 ± 0.06 for the study group. Binocular defocus curves were similar for both groups and there were no differences in contrast sensitivity values. Pooling the refractive results, 96% of eyes were within ±0.50 D of target refraction. Seventy percent of patients in the control group reported no halos, compared with 40% in the study group, p=0.047. In both groups, 40% of patients reported being completely spectacle-independent, with the other 60% requiring glasses for near vision always or often. All patients reported being fairly or very satisfied with their vision.

Conclusion

Initial results of visual function after Vivity implantation in patients with ocular pathologies are encouraging, with high patient satisfaction and few difficulties for daily activities.

Clinical Outcomes and Quality of Vision Associated with Bilateral Implantation of a Wavefront Shaping Presbyopia Correcting Intraocular Lens

Purpose

To provide normative visual acuity and quality of vision data related to bilateral implantation of a wavefront shaping presbyopia correcting intraocular lens (IOL).

Patients and Methods

This was a non-interventional research study of the refraction, visual acuity (VA) and quality of vision achieved after bilateral implantation of a wavefront shaping presbyopia correcting intraocular lens between 3 months and 12 months post-surgery. The manifest refraction, and uncorrected and distance corrected VA at near, intermediate and distance (40 cm, 50 cm, 66cm, 4 m) were tested. Binocular mesopic VA at 4m and uncorrected photopic low contrast (25%) VA at 4 m were also tested, the latter with and without a glare source. A patient reported outcome questionnaire was administered. Defocus curve testing with and without simulated myopia in the non-dominant eye was also tested (reported elsewhere).

Results

Forty subjects completed the study. There was no statistically significant difference between the uncorrected and distance corrected VA at any distance. Mean logMAR binocular VAs were (−0.07 ± 0.07) at 4 m, (0.00 ± 0.07) at 66 cm and (0.07 ± 0.11) at 40 cm. Uncorrected photopic low contrast VA was statistically significantly better without glare (0.09 ± 0.10) compared to with glare (0.44 ± 0.21, p < 0.01). Reported glare, halos and starbursts were “not at all” Or “a little” bothersome for more than 95% of subjects. Hazy vision and blurred vision were reported most often.

Conclusion

The Vivity IOL provided patients with good distance and intermediate vision, and functional near vision with low reported bother from glare, halos, or starbursts.

Point your SmartPhone at the code above. If you have a QR code reader the video abstract will appear. Or use:

https://youtu.be/fCukWtZz0pk

Profile of a new extended range-of-vision IOL: a laboratory study

Purpose

To evaluate the surface profile of a new-generation extended range-of-vision intraocular lens (IOL) and to compare it with that obtained for a monofocal IOL based on the same platform.

Methods

Prospective, experimental, laboratory study comparing the surface profile of the DFT015 (AcrySof IQ Vivity; Alcon Laboratories, Inc.), a new-generation presbyopia-correcting IOL, with the profile of the SN60WF (AcrySof IQ; Alcon Laboratories, Inc.), an aspheric monofocal IOL based on the same platform. Raw profiles were obtained using contact profilometry. The best-fit form was then subtracted from each raw profile to highlight potential differences.

Results

No significant differences were appreciated in raw profiles. On the contrary, after form removal, the new extended range-of-vision IOL showed a peculiar profile characterized by the presence of two altitudinal symmetrical changes in the order of 1 µm, localized in the central portion of the optic.

Conclusions

The new-generation extended range-of-vision IOL evaluated showed a smooth change of its surface compared to the same platform monofocal IOL. The altitudinal changes blended in the central design of the new presbyopia-correcting IOL, although micrometric, might play a crucial role in creating a continuous focal range while minimizing visual disturbances.