EC Ophthalmology

Research Article Volume 14 Issue 9 - 2023

Evaluation of the Quality of Visual Acuity, Stereoacuity, and Photic Phenomena After Bilateral Implantation of a Rotational Asymmetric Enhanced Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens in a Blended Vision Strategy

Detlev RH Breyer1,4*, David Lücht1, Mücella Kirca1, Lena Beckers1, Florian Kretz2,4 and Gerd Auffarth3,4

1Breyer Kaymak Klabe Augenchirurgie, Düsseldorf, Germany
2Augentagesklinik Rheine, Rheine, Germany
3University-Eye-Clinic, Heidelberg, Germany
4International Vision Correction Research Centre (IVCRC), University of Heidelberg, Germany

*Corresponding Author: Detlev RH Breyer, Breyer Kaymak Klabe Augenchirurgie, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Received: August 04, 2023; Published: August 29, 2023




Purpose: To examine visual acuity (VA), stereoacuity, and the amount of halo and glare phenomena in patients with a blended vision (BV) implantation strategy using a rotational asymmetric enhanced depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL). The dominant eye was targeted for emmetropia and the non-dominant eye for -1.5 D.

Materials and Methods: In this retrospective analysis, 46 eyes of 23 patients (female/male: 58.33%/41.67%, mean age: 65.9 years) were implanted with a rotational asymmetric enhanced depth of focus intraocular lens, the LENTIS Comfort LS-313 MF15 IOL (Teleon Surgical GmbH, Germany), in a BV strategy and underwent subjective refraction. Defocus curve was determined from 0 to -3.0 D. Stereoacuity was determined using the random dot stereoacuity test in 44 (91.3%) eyes. For measuring halo and glare phenomena, a group of 40 (87%) eyes matched photopsia through a simulation software assigning them to be “none”, “mild”, “moderate”, or “severe”.

Results: At all distances, a mean uncorrected VA (UVA) of 0.08 ± 0.12 logMAR was achieved. A mean stereoacuity of 0.15 ± 0.38 (min -0.18; max 1.12) logMAS was measured. In seven cases (35%) photic phenomena were assigned as “none”, in eight cases (40%) patients described them as “mild”, while five (25%) described them as “moderate”. Nobody showed “severe” photic phenomena.

Conclusion: Postoperatively, the patients could drive, work at 60 - 80 cm distance, and read newspaper print without glasses. Stereoacuity was similar to that of healthy people without cataract. Halo and glare were comparable to extended depth of focus IOL. This BV strategy may constitute an alternative to trifocal IOL implantation, in patients who want to avoid severe photopic phenomena and accept a blended vision strategy.

Keywords: Cataract Surgery; Blended Vision; Extended Depth of Focus; Stereoacuity

  1. Kohnen T., et al. “Cataract surgery with implantation of an artificial lens”. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International43 (2009): 695-702.
  2. Leyland M and Zinicola E. “Multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses in cataract surgery: a systematic review”. Ophthalmology9 (2003): 1789-1798.
  3. Breyer DRH., et al. “Current review: multifocal intraocular lenses and extended depth of focus intraocular lenses”. Klinische Monatsblätter Augenheilkunde8 (2020): 943-957.
  4. Rampat R and Gatinel D. “Multifocal and extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses in 2020”. Ophthalmology11 (2021): e164-e185.
  5. Breyer DRH., et al. “Multifocal intraocular lenses and extended depth of focus intraocular lenses”. Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology (Philadelphia)4 (2017): 339-349.
  6. De Vries NE., et al. “Dissatisfaction after implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses”. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery5 (2011): 859-865.
  7. Woodward MA., et al. “Dissatisfaction after multifocal intraocular lens implantation”. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery6 (2009): 992-997.
  8. Alio JL., et al. “Multifocal intraocular lenses: an overview”. Survey Ophthalmology5 (2017): 611-634.
  9. Kanclerz P., et al. “Extended depth-of-field intraocular lenses: an update”. Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology (Philadelphia)3 (2020): 194-202.
  10. Kaymak H., et al. “Functional results 3 months after implantation of an “extended range of vision” intraocular lens”. Klinische Monatsblätter Augenheilkunde8 (2016): 923-927.
  11. Kretz FTA., et al. “Clinical evaluation of a novel intraocular lens with enhanced depth of focus (EDOF) to increase visual acuity for intermediate distances”. Klinische Monblätter Augenheilkunde8 (2018): 874-880.
  12. Son HS., et al. “Prospective comparative study of tolerance to refractive errors after implantation of extended depth of focus and monofocal intraocular lenses with identical aspheric platform in Korean population”. BMC Ophthalmology1 (2019): 187.
  13. Tarib I., et al. “Comparison of visual outcomes and patient satisfaction after bilateral implantation of an EDOF IOL and a mix-and-match approach”. Journal of Refractive Surgery7 (2019): 408-416.
  14. Lubiński W., et al. “Comparison of visual outcomes after implantation of At Lisa tri 839 MP and Symfony intraocular lenses”. International Ophthalmology10 (2020): 2553-2562.
  15. Ozulken K., et al. “A comparative evaluation of diffractive trifocal and new refractive/extended depth of focus intraocular lenses for refractive lens exchange”. Current Eye Research6 (2021): 811-817.
  16. Coassin M., et al. “Extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses: power calculation and outcomes”. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery11 (2020): 1554-1560.
  17. Baudu P., et al. “Uncorrected binocular performance after biaspheric ablation profile for presbyopic corneal treatment using AMARIS with the PresbyMAX module”. American Journal Ophthalmology4 (2013): 636-647, 647.e1.
  18. Falcon C., et al. “Laser blended vision for presbyopia: results after 3 years”. Journal Francais D´Ophtalmology5 (2015): 431-439.
  19. Reinstein DZ., et al. “LASIK for presbyopia correction in emmetropic patients using aspheric ablation profiles and a micro-monovision protocol with the Carl Zeiss Meditec MEL 80 and VisuMax”. Journal of Refractive Surgery8 (2012): 531-541.
  20. Reinstein DZ., et al. “LASIK for myopic astigmatism and presbyopia using non-linear aspheric micro-monovision with the Carl Zeiss Meditec MEL 80 Platform”. Journal of Refractive Surgery1 (2011): 23-37.
  21. Reinstein DZ., et al. “LASIK for hyperopic astigmatism and presbyopia using micro-monovision with the Carl Zeiss Meditec MEL80 platform”. Journal of Refractive Surgery1 (2009): 37-58.
  22. Kretz FT., et al. “Refraction after implantation of multifocal and presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses”. Klinische Monatsblätter Augenheilkunde8 (2015): 953-956.
  23. Kulp MT and Mitchell GL. “Randot stereoacuity testing in young children”. Journal of Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus6 (2005): 360-364.
  24. Birch E., et al. “Randot preschool stereoacuity test: normative data and validity”. Journal of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus1 (2008): 23-26.
  25. Peyman A., et al. “Correct method for statistical analysis of stereopsis in ophthalmology research”. Graefes Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology5 (2012): 781-783.
  26. Serdiuk V., et al. “Comparison of three different presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses”. Romanian Journal of Ophthalmology4 (2020): 364-379.
  27. Jin S., et al. “Comparison of postoperative visual performance between bifocal and trifocal intraocular lens based on randomized controlled trails: a meta-analysis”. BMC Ophthalmology1 (2019): 78.
  28. Plaza-Puche AB., et al. “Analysis of defocus curves of different modern multifocal intraocular lenses”. European Journal of Ophthalmology5 (2016): 412-417.
  29. Nakajima D., et al. “Clinical Outcome of Lentis Comfort Intraocular Lens Implantation”. Journal of Nippon Medical School5 (2021): 398-407.
  30. Oshika T., et al. “Prospective assessment of plate-haptic rotationally asymmetric multifocal toric intraocular lens with near addition of + 1.5 diopters”. BMC Ophthalmology 20 (2020): 454-462.
  31. Marques EF and Ferreira TB. “Comparison of visual outcomes of 2 diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses”. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery2 (2015): 354-363.
  32. Auffarth GU., et al. “European, multicenter, prospective, non-comparative clinical evaluation of an extended depth of focus intraocular lens”. Journal of Refractive Surgery7 (2020): 426-434.
  33. Savini G., et al. “Visual performance of a new extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens compared to a distance-dominant diffractive multifocal intraocular lens”. Journal of Refractive Surgery4 (2018): 228-235.
  34. Zhong Y., et al. “Comparison of trifocal or hybrid multifocal-extended depth of focus intraocular lenses: a systematic review and meta-analysis”. Scientific Reports1 (2021): 6699.
  35. Blehm C and Potvin R. “Evaluating refractive and visual outcomes after bilateral implantation of an apodized diffractive multifocal toric intraocular lens with a moderate add in the dominant eye and a higher add in the fellow eye”. Clinical Ophthalmology14 (2020): 1035-1041.
  36. Wilkins MR., et al. “Randomized trial of multifocal intraocular lenses versus monovision after bilateral cataract surgery”. Ophthalmology12 (2013): 2449-2455.e1.
  37. Breyer DRH. “MIOL-Implantation nach dem “Düsseldorfer Schema”. Der Augenspiegel (2016): 24-28.

Detlev RH Breyer., et al. Evaluation of the Quality of Visual Acuity, Stereoacuity, and Photic Phenomena After Bilateral Implantation of a Rotational Asymmetric Enhanced Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens in a Blended Vision Strategy. EC Ophthalmology 14.9 (2023): 01-09.

ECronicon Journal

Our Services

Quick Links

Information

Creative Commons LicenseOpen Access by ECronicon is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Based on a work at www.ecronicon.net