Search

Purpose: To assess the power profile and optical performance of 2 extended range-of-vision (ERV) intraocular lenses (IOLs), TECNIS Eyhance (ICB00) and LuxSmart, and compare them with their monofocal counterpart lenses with similar platforms and materials: TECNIS 1-piece (ZCB00) and LuxGood, respectively. Setting: Optics and Optometry Faculties of Complutense University (Madrid) and Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Barcelona-Tech (Terrassa) in Spain. Design: Laboratory investigation on optical bench. Methods: For each design, the power distribution and (fourth and sixth-order) spherical aberration (SA) across the lens aperture were measured as well as the optical performance using modulation transfer function-based metrics with through-focus evaluation. 3 nominal powers (+10.00 diopters [D], +20.00 D, and +30.00 D) and 3 pupil sizes (2.0 mm, 3.0 mm, and 4.5 mm) were considered to assess whether the base power of the lens and pupillary dynamics have an influence on the depth-of-focus extension. Results: TECNIS Eyhance and LuxSmart IOLs had different power and SA profiles, but both designs shared a positive add power in their central region in comparison with their monofocal counterparts. LuxSmart had a greater add power while TECNIS Eyhance showed higher peak optical quality but smaller depth of focus. Conclusions: Differences of focus extension between the 2 ERV IOL designs are related to differences of power and SA profile. The nominal base power of the IOLs has little effect on their optical quality. However, pupil dynamics plays a key role since it determines the effective add power and optical performance of the ERV IOLs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this work was to compare an enhanced monofocal (RayOne EMV RAO200E, Rayner) and standard monofocal (RayOne RAO600C Aspheric, Rayner) intraocular lenses (IOLs) for three nominal powers (+10.00 D, +20.00 D and +30.00 D) as a function of the optical aperture diameter (pupil diameter) using a commercial Schlieren phase-shifting deflectometer NIMO TR1504 (Lambda-X, Belgium). From the wavefront maps measured by this instrument, the radial power profiles, the spherical aberration coefficients of the Zernike polynomial expansion (as a function of the optical aperture radius), and the root-mean-square (RMS) of the high-order aberrations (HOAs) were obtained and analyzed by comparing the two models. The results showed that the effective added power that could be obtained with the enhanced model depended directly on the pupil size and the power of the IOL implanted. The higher additions were achieved with the higher nominal IOL powers. The relationship between the pupil diameter, the corneal aberration of the patients and the power profile of these IOLs could have a crucial implication on the far distance and the final effective addition. However, it is important to note that these findings should be clinically validated through the implantation of these models in patients' lenses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The optical quality of three multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs) was measured in vitro using the area under the modulation transfer function (MTFa) and energy efficiency (EE). We evaluated those metrics through-focus (TF) by axially scanning the image space with three wavelengths (R, G, B). High linear correlation between MTFa and EE was found for all cases. Correlations between optical in vitro results (polychromatic TF-MTFa and TF-EE) and clinical visual acuity (VA) defocus curves for the three MIOLs allowed us to derive mathematical expressions. Both metrics proved to be equivalent to predict postoperative VA.

It is important to distinguish between visual acuity, optical quality and quality of vision when outcomes obtained with intraocular lenses are evaluated. These parameters, that includeobjective and subjective tests, should be assessed to obtain results that are not biased. To assess the difference in visual and optical quality between two monofocal intraocular lens models. : This was a prospective, parallel and randomised clinical study conducted at Miranza IOA, a private clinic in Madrid, Spain. Sixty patients were implanted bilaterally, 30 per group, with two aspheric IOLs with induced spherical aberration of −0.27 μm for Group A and −0.20 μm for Group B. Visual outcomes obtained at 1 and 3 months after surgery included both uncorrected (UCVA) and corrected monocular distance visual acuity (DCVA), objective scattering index (OSI), modulation transfer function (MTF) cut-off, Strehl Ratio (SR), contrast sensitivity defocus curve (CSDC), intraocular lens spherical aberration (SA), and longitudinal chromatic aberration of the eye. Activity limitations in daily life were assessed using CatQuest-9SF questionnaire. There were statistically significant differences for DCVA (0.04 LogMAR; p =.008) and SR (0.03; p =.003) between groups. Outcomes related to CSDC showed statistically significant differences for vergences between −0.50 D and +1.00 D (3 mm pupil) and for vergences of 0.00 D and +0.50 D (4.5 mm pupil) between groups. Overall, Group A showed better results regarding visual and optical quality, including a lower longitudinal chromatic aberration result in comparison to Group B. Patient satisfaction evaluated with CatQuest-9SF showed that Group A achieved better outcomes, although the differences were statistically significant only for the 'Reading text on television' item (p = 0.027). Both intraocular lens models showed excellent quantity of vision, optical and visual quality as well as high patient satisfaction. Despite this, the the Group A model provided slightly better outcomes than the Group B model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Compare subjective (Rx) and objective (ObjRx) refractions outcomes with two autorefractors models and an aberrometer in eyes implanted with a hydrophobic trifocal IOL (FineVision POD F GF, Physiol, Liége, Belgium) and a hydrophilic one (FineVision POD F, Physiol, Liége, Belgium). Prospective comparative cohort study, with 100 subjects randomly assigned to either the POD F group (n = 50) or the POD F-GF group (n = 50). Postoperative eye examinations at 1-month visit included seven result sets, one for each assessment method: Rx, AR (automated refraction measured with the autorefractor KR8800), WF-P (Zernike-coefficients-based objective refraction, photopic pupil size), WF-M (Zernike-coefficients-based objective refraction, mesopic pupil size), WF-4 (Zernike-coefficients-based objective refraction, 4 mm pupil), OPD-C (automated refraction measured with the aberrometer OPD in the central pupil/photopic conditions), and OPD-M (automated refraction measured with the aberrometer OPD under mesopic conditions). Mean differences between ObjRx and Rx reached statistical significance for sphere and spherical equivalent (M) only with OPD-C in the POD F-GF group. All ObjRx methods showed significant differences with Rx in the POD F group, with some values differing by more than 0.50 D (−0.58 D in M for the WF-P). Bland Altman plots showed better agreement for the astigmatic components, and for sphere and spherical equivalents in both IOL groups measured with AR and OPD-M. None of the objective methods of refraction evaluated in this study were as reliable as the subjective refraction, irrespective of the lens material, but POD F-GF ObjRx seems to differ less with Rx than POD F ObjRx values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]