Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jan 31:2018:6165493.
doi: 10.1155/2018/6165493. eCollection 2018.

Through-Focus Vision Performance and Light Disturbances of 3 New Intraocular Lenses for Presbyopia Correction

Santiago Escandón-García  1 , Filomena J Ribeiro  2 , Colm McAlinden  3   4 , António Queirós  1 , José M González-Méijome  1
Affiliations

Through-Focus Vision Performance and Light Disturbances of 3 New Intraocular Lenses for Presbyopia Correction

Santiago Escandón-García et al. J Ophthalmol. .

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the through-focus visual performance in a clinical population of pseudophakic patients implanted with two new trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and one extended depth of focus IOL.

Methods: Prospective, nonrandomized, examiner-masked case series. Twenty-three patients received the FineVision® and seven patients received the PanOptix™ trifocal IOLs. Fifteen patients received the Symfony extended depth of focus IOL. Mean age of patients was 63 ± 8 years. Through-focus visual acuity was measured from -3.00 to +1.00 D vergences. Contrast sensitivity was measured with and without a source of glare. Light disturbances were evaluated with the Light Distortion Analyzer.

Results: Though-focus evaluation showed that trifocal IOLs performed significantly better at near distance (33 and 40 cm), and extended depth of focus performed significantly better at intermediate distance (1.0 m). Contrast sensitivity function with glare and dysphotopsia was similar between the three IOLs and subjective response to questionnaire showed a significantly higher score (worse performance) for the extended depth of focus IOL compared to both trifocal IOLs in the bothersome subscale (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: Trifocal IOLs grant better performance at near distance while extended depth of focus IOL performs better at intermediate distance. Objective dysphotopsia measured with the Light Distortion Analyzer is not reduced in extended depth of focus IOL compared to trifocal IOLs.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Defocus curves for the three lenses under comparison in this study. Error bars represent 1 × SD. ∗Statistically significantly different at 0.05 level (Kruskal-Wallis).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Contrast sensitivity function under photopic (a) and scotopic (b) conditions measured with the Functional Visual Analyzer. Error bars represent 1 × SD. ∗Statistically significantly different at 0.05 level (Kruskal-Wallis). To avoid collapsing the lines, only the lower limit of normality is shown (dashed line).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Light distortion index (%) for the three IOLs under evaluation. Error bars represent 1 × SD.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Quality of Vision (QoV) questionnaire scores for the three IOL groups across the three subscales of the questionnaire (frequency, severity, and bothersome). Error bars represent 1 × SD. ∗Statistically significantly different at 0.05 level (Kruskal-Wallis).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. de Vries N. E., Nuijts R. M. M. A. Multifocal intraocular lenses in cataract surgery: literature review of benefits and side effects. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 2013;39(2):268–278. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2012.12.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pieh S., Lackner B., Hanselmayer G., et al. Halo size under distance and near conditions in refractive multifocal intraocular lenses. The British Journal of Ophthalmology. 2001;85(7):816–821. doi: 10.1136/bjo.85.7.816. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kamiya K., Hayashi K., Shimizu K., et al. Multifocal intraocular lens explantation: a case series of 50 eyes. American Journal of Ophthalmology. 2014;158(2):215–220.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2014.04.010. - DOI - PubMed
    1. de Vries N. E., Webers C. A. B., Touwslager W. R. H., et al. Dissatisfaction after implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 2011;37(5):859–865. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.11.032. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Buckhurst P. J., Naroo S. A., Davies L. N., et al. Tablet app halometer for the assessment of dysphotopsia. Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 2015;41(11):2424–2429. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.05.041. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources