Patients' dissatisfaction with multifocal intraocular lenses managed by exchange with other multifocal lenses of different optical profiles
- PMID: 35227312
- PMCID: PMC8887122
- DOI: 10.1186/s40662-022-00280-8
Patients' dissatisfaction with multifocal intraocular lenses managed by exchange with other multifocal lenses of different optical profiles
Abstract
Background: The aim of the study was to evaluate the outcomes of dissatisfied patients reporting poor visual quality following implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses (MF-IOLs), managed by IOL exchange with another multifocal optical profile.
Methods: This is a retrospective series of cases. MF-IOL exchange was done in 15 dissatisfied patients (30 eyes) with the perception of poor visual quality for far distance affected by neuroadaptation failure. Patients underwent a bilateral exchange of a MF-IOL with another MF-IOL of a different optical profile. Visual outcomes and complications were analyzed. Questionnaires including Quality of Vision (QoV), Visual Function Index-14 (VF-14) and its Rasch-revised version (VF-8R) and a satisfaction questionnaire were also used for outcome evaluation.
Results: The mean elapsed time from implantation to explantation-reimplantation was 11.8 months. The QoV scores improved significantly across all the three subscales. Visual function improved with a change in VF-14 score from 60.41 ± 24.81 to 90.16 ± 10.91 (P < 0.001). The VF-8R score improved as well. The uncorrected distance visual acuity improved from 0.24 to 0.12 logMAR after exchange (P < 0.001) and corrected distance visual acuity improved from 0.15 to 0.04 logMAR (P < 0.001). Safety and efficacy indexes reached 1.46 and 1.16, respectively. Concerning patients' satisfaction following MF-IOL exchange, 80% of the patients reported they would have the MF-IOL reimplantation procedure again.
Conclusions: Patient dissatisfaction with neuroadaptation failure following MF-IOL implantation can be managed in 80% of our cases by MF-IOL exchange with a different MF-IOL optical profile.
© 2022. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
Jorge L. Alio: Akkolens (C,S); Carl Zeiss Meditec (S,C); CSO (S); Hanita Lenses (C,S); Ophthec (L); Tekia (O); Associate editor of Eye and Vision; C = Consultant/advisor; E = Employee; L = Lecture fees; O = Equity owner; P = Patents/royalty; S = Clinical research grant. Colm McAlinden: Consultancy: Alcon, ClarVista, Ophtec, Acufocus, STAAR Surgical, RxSight, Bausch and Lomb, Perfect lens, Power Vision, Zeiss, Sight Glass Vision, CORD LLC, Ora, targomed GmbH, LensGen, PhysIOL, Ocudyne, Schwind; Travel: Thea, Bayer, Allergan; Editorial board member of Eye and Vision. Jorge L. Alió del Barrio: None. Olena Al-Shymali: None. Mario Canto-Cerdan: None.
Similar articles
-
Managing dissatisfaction after multifocal intraocular lens implantation through lens exchange using monofocal or alternative multifocal IOLs.Acta Ophthalmol. 2024 Nov;102(7):e1040-e1049. doi: 10.1111/aos.16720. Epub 2024 May 23. Acta Ophthalmol. 2024. PMID: 38780148
-
Multifocal intraocular lens exchange to monofocal for the management of neuroadaptation failure.Eye Vis (Lond). 2022 Nov 1;9(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s40662-022-00311-4. Eye Vis (Lond). 2022. PMID: 36316701 Free PMC article.
-
A comparative clinical study of the visual results between three types of multifocal lenses.Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2010 Jan;248(1):133-40. doi: 10.1007/s00417-009-1177-4. Epub 2009 Sep 8. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2010. PMID: 19763600 Clinical Trial.
-
One-year outcomes with new-generation multifocal intraocular lenses.Ophthalmology. 2008 Sep;115(9):1508-16. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.04.017. Epub 2008 Jun 5. Ophthalmology. 2008. PMID: 18538402 Clinical Trial.
-
[Multifocal intraocular lenses--an assessment of current status].Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 1993 Jul;203(1):19-33. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1045645. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 1993. PMID: 8411889 Review. German.
Cited by
-
Four-flanged polypropylene optic piercing technique for scleral fixation of multifocal intraocular lens.BMC Ophthalmol. 2023 Sep 26;23(1):392. doi: 10.1186/s12886-023-03133-7. BMC Ophthalmol. 2023. PMID: 37752479 Free PMC article.
-
Importance of corneal spherical aberration in pupil area for multifocal intraocular lens selection: a case report.BMC Ophthalmol. 2025 Mar 25;25(1):151. doi: 10.1186/s12886-025-03992-2. BMC Ophthalmol. 2025. PMID: 40133883 Free PMC article.
-
Visual and patient reported outcomes provided by a refractive multifocal intraocular lens based on continuous transitional focus.Eye Vis (Lond). 2024 Oct 14;11(1):41. doi: 10.1186/s40662-024-00408-y. Eye Vis (Lond). 2024. PMID: 39402644 Free PMC article.
-
Outcomes of mini-monovision with monofocal, enhanced monofocal and extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses.Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Feb 21;12:1522383. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1522383. eCollection 2025. Front Med (Lausanne). 2025. PMID: 40061383 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Risk factors for photic phenomena in two different multifocal diffractive intraocular lenses.Sci Rep. 2025 Jan 2;15(1):121. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-83838-x. Sci Rep. 2025. PMID: 39747414 Free PMC article.
References
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources