Search

Purpose: To compare the visual and intraocular optical quality outcomes with different designs of the refractive rotationally asymmetric multifocal intraocular lens (MFIOL) (Lentis Mplus; Oculentis GmbH, Berlin, Germany) with or without capsular tension ring (CTR) implantation., Methods: One hundred thirty-five consecutive eyes of 78 patients with cataract (ages 36 to 82 years) were divided into three groups: 43 eyes implanted with the C-Loop haptic design without CTR (C-Loop haptic only group); 47 eyes implanted with the C-Loop haptic design with CTR (C-Loop haptic with CTR group); and 45 eyes implanted with the plate-haptic design (plate-haptic group). Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, defocus curve, and ocular and intraocular optical quality were evaluated at 3 months postoperatively., Results: Significant differences in the postoperative sphere were found (P = .01), with a more myopic postoperative refraction for the C-Loop haptic only group. No significant differences were detected in photopic and scotopic contrast sensitivity among groups (P ⩾ .05). Significantly better visual acuities were present in the C-Loop haptic with CTR group for the defocus levels of -2.0, -1.5, -1.0, and -0.50 D (P ⩽.03). Statistically significant differences among groups were found in total intraocular root mean square (RMS), high-order intraocular RMS, and intraocular coma-like RMS aberrations (P ⩽.04), with lower values from the plate-haptic group., Conclusions: The plate-haptic design and the C-Loop haptic design with CTR implantation both allow good visual rehabilitation. However, better refractive predictability and intraocular optical quality was obtained with the plate-haptic design without CTR implantation. The plate-haptic design seems to be a better design to support rotational asymmetric MFIOL optics., (Copyright 2013, SLACK Incorporated.)

Purpose: To compare the visual acuity outcomes and ocular optical performance of eyes implanted with a multifocal refractive intraocular lens (IOL) with an inferior segmental near add or a diffractive multifocal IOL., Design: Prospective, comparative, nonrandomized, consecutive case series., Participants: Eighty-three consecutive eyes of 45 patients (age range, 36-82 years) with cataract were divided into 2 groups: group A, 45 eyes implanted with Lentis Mplus LS-312 (Oculentis GmbH, Berlin, Germany); group B, 38 eyes implanted with diffractive IOL Acri.Lisa 366D (Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany)., Methods: All patients underwent phacoemulsification followed by IOL implantation in the capsular bag. Distance corrected, intermediate, and near with the distance correction visual acuity outcomes and contrast sensitivity, intraocular aberrations, and defocus curve were evaluated postoperatively during a 3-month follow-up., Main Outcome Measures: Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), corrected distance near and intermediate visual acuity (CDNVA), contrast sensitivity, intraocular aberrations, and defocus curve., Results: A significant improvement in UDVA, CDVA, and UNVA was observed in both groups after surgery (P ≤ 0.04). Significantly better values of UNVA (P<0.01) and CDNVA (P<0.04) were found in group B. In the defocus curve, significantly better visual acuities were present in eyes in group A for intermediate vision levels of defocus (P ≤ 0.04). Significantly higher amounts of postoperative intraocular primary coma and spherical aberrations were found in group A (P<0.01). In addition, significantly better values were observed in photopic contrast sensitivity for high spatial frequencies in group A (P ≤ 0.04)., Conclusions: The Lentis Mplus LS-312 and Acri.Lisa 366D IOLs are able to successfully restore visual function after cataract surgery. The Lentis Mplus LS-312 provided better intermediate vision and contrast sensitivity outcomes than the Acri.Lisa 366D. However, the Acri.Lisa design provided better distance and near visual outcomes and intraocular optical performance parameters., (Copyright © 2012 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To compare the visual outcomes and intraocular optical quality observed postoperatively in patients implanted with a rotationally asymmetric multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) and an apodized diffractive multifocal IOL., Methods: Seventy-four consecutive eyes of 40 cataract patients (age range: 36 to 79 years) were divided into two groups: zonal refractive group, 39 eyes implanted with a rotationally asymmetric multifocal IOL (Lentis Mplus LS-312 IOL, Oculentis GmbH); and diffractive group, 35 eyes implanted with an apodized diffractive multifocal IOL (ReSTOR SN6AD3, Alcon Laboratories Inc). Distance and near visual acuity outcomes, contrast sensitivity, intraocular optical quality, and defocus curves were evaluated during 3-month follow-up. Calculation of the intraocular aberrations was performed by subtracting corneal aberrations from total ocular aberrations., Results: Uncorrected near visual acuity and distance-corrected near visual acuity were better in the diffractive group than in the zonal refractive group (P=.01), whereas intermediate visual acuity (defocus +1.00 and +1.50 diopters) was better in the zonal refractive group. Photopic contrast sensitivity was significantly better in the zonal refractive group (P=.04). Wavefront aberrations (total, higher order, tilt, primary coma) were significantly higher in the zonal refractive group than in the diffractive group (P=.02)., Conclusions: Both multifocal IOLs are able to successfully restore visual function after cataract surgery. The zonal refractive multifocal IOL provides better results in contrast sensitivity and intermediate vision, whereas the diffractive multifocal IOL provides better near vision at a closer distance., (Copyright 2012, SLACK Incorporated.)

Purpose: To compare the clinical outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of 2 models of a new rotationally asymmetric multifocal IOL to ascertain which provides better visual performance and patient satisfaction., Setting: Vissum Instituto Oftalmologico de Alicante, Alicante, Spain., Design: Comparative case series., Methods: Consecutive eyes of cataract patients were divided into 2 groups. Group A received a Lentis Mplus LS-312 MF15 IOL (with a near addition [add] power of +1.50 diopters [D]) and Group B, a Lentis Mplus LS-312 MF30 IOL (with a near add power of +3.00 D). Distance, near, and intermediate visual acuity outcomes were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively during a 6-month follow-up. Postoperative contrast sensitivity, patient satisfaction, ocular aberrations, ocular optical quality, and defocus curves were analyzed., Results: Patients ranged in age from 55 to 83 years. Group A comprised 22 eyes and Group B, 21 eyes. Both groups had a statistically significant improvement in uncorrected and corrected distance and corrected near visual acuities postoperatively (P≤.01). Group B had statistically significantly better uncorrected and distance-corrected near visual acuity (P≤.01) and Group A, significantly better uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (P=.01) at 3 months. There were statistically significant differences between-group differences in several levels of defocus based on defocus curves. There were no significant differences in postoperative contrast sensitivity, patient satisfaction, optical quality, and ocular aberrometry between groups (P≥.07)., Conclusions: Both IOL models restored distance visual function and improved intermediate vision. Near visual rehabilitation was complete with the +3.00 D add IOL., (Copyright © 2011 ASCRS and ESCRS. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To compare bilateral reading performance within the first 6 months after implantation of 4 intraocular lens (IOL) models., Setting: Vissum-Instituto de Oftalmológico de Alicante, Alicante, Spain, and University Eye Clinic, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria., Design: Comparative case series., Methods: Patients had bilateral phacoemulsification and implantation of Acri.Smart 48S monofocal, Acrysof Restor SN6AD3 apodized multifocal, Acri.LISA 366D diffractive multifocal, or Rezoom refractive multifocal IOLs. Bilateral reading performance with and without near correction was evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively using the Salzburg Reading Desk., Results: The study comprised 304 eyes of 152 patients 51 to 90 years old. All groups had a significant improvement in uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuities postoperatively (P≤.01). The apodized multifocal and diffractive multifocal groups had significantly better uncorrected reading acuity than the monofocal and refractive multifocal groups 1 month and 6 months postoperatively (P<.01). Uncorrected reading speed was significantly worse in the refractive multifocal group than in the monofocal group at 1 month (P<.01). The monofocal group had the greatest uncorrected reading distance at 1 month and 6 months (P<.01)., Conclusion: Multifocal IOLs with a diffractive component provided a comparable reading performance that was significantly better than the one obtained with refractive multifocal and monofocal IOLs., (Copyright © 2011 ASCRS and ESCRS. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To compare vision-related quality of life using the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) in patients with 1 of 3 types of intraocular lenses (IOLs) and to correlate it with postoperative visual outcomes., Setting: Vissum Corporation-Instituto Oftalmológico de Alicante, Alicante, Spain., Design: Comparative case series., Methods: This study comprised eyes having cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of a monofocal IOL (Group A), apodized multifocal IOL (Group B), or full diffractive multifocal IOL (Group C). Distance and near visual acuities, contrast sensitivity, and quality of life were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively., Results: The study enrolled 106 eyes (53 patients; age range 49 to 80 years). All groups had significant improvement in uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuities postoperatively (P ≤.05). Near vision outcomes were significantly better in Groups B and C (P ≤.01). Groups B and C had significantly less difficulty in some near tasks, such as reading the newspaper (A-B, P=.02; A-C, P=.02) or reading bills (A-B, P=.04; A-C, P=.004). Group C also had significantly less difficulty driving at night than Group B (P<.01). Near visual acuity and contrast sensitivity were significantly correlated with difficulty in near visual tasks in Groups B and C. Night-driving difficulty correlated significantly with contrast sensitivity in Group B., Conclusions: Patients with multifocal IOLs could perform several daily tasks at near and intermediate distances, with less night-driving limitation with the full diffractive IOL than with apodized multifocal and monofocal IOLs., Financial Disclosure: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned., (Copyright © 2011 ASCRS and ESCRS. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)