Influence of pupillary dynamics on the defocus curve of eyes implanted with diffractive multifocal lenses: a randomized study / Influência da dinâmica pupilar na curva de desfoco de olhos implantados com lentes multifocais difrativas: um estudo randomizado

ABSTRACT Purpose: To evaluate the influence of pupil dynamics on the defocus profile and area-of-focus of eyes implanted with a diffractive multifocal intraocular lens (IOL). Methods: This prospective randomized trial was conducted at the Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Brazil. Thirty-eight patients were randomly assigned to receive the multifocal SN6AD1 (n=20) or the aspheric monofocal SN60WF (aIOL) (n=18) IOLs bilaterally. Dynamic pupillometry, visual acuity for distance and near, corrected and uncorrected, and a defocus profile were assessed postoperatively. The area-of-focus was calculated using an empirical polynomial model of the defocus profile. Results: Sixteen patients (32 eyes) in the multifocal SN6AD1 group and 17 patients (34 eyes) in the aspheric monofocal SN60WF group completed the 1-year follow-up. There were no significant between-group differences in monocular uncorrected distance or near visual acuity. The defocus profiles of the mfIOL group showed a double peak, whereas those of the aspheric monofocal SN60WF group showed only one peak, which is typical for a monofocal intraocular lens. The area-of-focus of the aIOL group (4.66 ± 1.51 logMARxD) was significantly different from that of the multifocal SN6AD1 (1.99 ± 1.31 logMARxD). Pupil size at maximum contraction after exposure to a flash of 30 cd/m2 for 1 second was significantly correlated with a better area-of-focus in the multifocal SN6AD1 group (r=0.54; p=0.0017), whereas this was not the case in the aspheric monofocal SN60WF group. Conclusion: These findings indicate that in eyes implanted with an multifocal SN6AD1, the smaller the pupil size, the better is the area-of-focus and hence the better is the visual performance. This correlation was not found for the aspheric monofocal SN60WF.(AU)

RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar a influência da dinâmica pupilar na curva de desfoco de olhos implantados com lente intraoculares multifocais difrativas. Métodos: Estudo prospectivo e randomizado realizado na Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto - Universidade de São Paulo - Departamento de Oftalmologia. Trinta e oito pacientes foram aleatoriamente designados para receber bilateralmente lentes intraoculares SN6AD1 (n=20) (mfIOL) ou SN60WF (n=18) (aIOL). Além da acuidade visual para longe e perto, corrigida e não corrigida, e curva de desfoco, foi ainda realizada pupilometria dinâmica. A área sob a curva de desfoco foi calculada usando um modelo polinomial empírico. Resultados: Um total de 16 e 17 pacientes (n=32 e 34 olhos) completaram 1 ano de seguimento nos grupos mfIOL e aIOL, respectivamente. Não houve diferenças significativas entre grupos para as acuidades visuais seja para longe ou perto. As curvas de desfoco do grupo mfIOL mostraram um pico duplo; enquanto o SN60WF mostrou apenas um pico, típico para uma lente intraoculares monofocal. A média da área sob a curva de desfoco do grupo aIOL foi (4,66 ± 1,51 logMAR.dp), e essa é estatisticamente significante diferente da métrica do grupo mfIOL (1,99 ± 1,31 logMAR.dp). A pupila na contração máxima após a exposição a um flash de 30 cd/m2 por 1 segundo foi significativamente correlacionada com uma melhor área de foco no grupo mfIOL (r=0,54; p=0,0017), essa relação não foi observada para o grupo aIOL. Conclusão: Estes dados indicam que quanto menor a pupila durante contração, melhor é a área sob a curva de desfoco e, portanto, o desempenho visual dos olhos implantados com essa mfIOL. Esta correlação não foi encontrada para lentes intraoculares monofocais.(AU)

Laser topoguiado como redutor de aberrações ópticas pós ceratotomia radial e LIO multifocal / Topoguided laser as a reducer of optical aberrations after radial keratotomy and multifocal LIO

Resumo A cirurgia de catarata com implante de lente intra-ocular é uma das cirurgias mais realizadas no mundo e, atualmente, os pacientes que se submetem a essa cirurgia podem utilizar o implante com lente intraocular (LIO) multifocal como alternativa ao uso de óculos. Um grande desafio para o cirurgião são os pacientes já submetidos previamente a ceratotomia radial (RK), pois além de terem um cálculo biométrico mais desafiador, apresentam importantes aberrações ópticas corneanas, sendo uma contra-indicação para o uso de lentes multifocais para a maioria dos oftalmologistas. Neste artigo, relatamos o caso de uma paciente que foi submetida, na juventude, a uma RK e passou a referir importante incômodo visual após a correção de catarata com facectomia e implante de LIO multifocal. Esta paciente foi submetida a uma ceratectomia fotorrefrativa (PRK) para diminuir as irregularidades da córnea com boa evolução clínica e resultado visual satisfatório. Esse caso chama a atenção para a alternativa do excimer laser topoguiado em casos semelhantes e alerta para o risco do uso desse tipo de lente em córneas irregulares.

Abstract Cataract surgery with intraocular lens implantation is one of the most commonly performed surgeries in the world and, currently, patients who undergo this surgery can use the multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implant as an alternative to wearing glasses. A great challenge for the surgeon are patients who have previously undergone radial keratotomy (RK), because in addition to having a more challenging biometric calculation, they also have important corneal optical aberrations, being a contraindication for the use of multifocal lenses for most patients. ophthalmologists. In this article, we report the case of a patient who underwent a RK in her youth and started to report an important visual discomfort after cataract correction with facectomy and multifocal IOL implantation. This patient underwent a photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) to reduce corneal irregularities with good clinical evolution and satisfactory visual result. This case draws attention to the alternative of topography-guided laser excimer in similar cases and warns of the risk of using this type of lens in irregular corneas.

Comparing the postoperative refractive predictability of Pentacam HR and IOLMaster 500 after a multifocal intraocular lens implantation / Comparação da previsibilidade refrativa pós-operatória do Pentacam HR e IOLMaster 500 após implante de lentes intraoculares multifocais

ABSTRACT Purpose: To compare the postoperative refractive predictability of IOLMaster 500 and Pentacam HR on the basis of keratometry and anterior chamber depth values in eyes with an indication for multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Methods: This was a retrospective study conducted on 118 eyes treated with phacoemulsification and multifocal intraocular lens implantation. Only the eyes that achieved emmetropia in the dynamic refraction performed on postoperative day 30 were included. Haigis' formula was used in each case to calculate the intraocular lens power, and the intraocular lens with the target refraction closest to emmetropia was implanted. Four lens calculation scenarios were tested by combining keratometry and anterior chamber depth measurements obtained using the two devices. Results: IOLMaster 500 and Pentacam HR differed with regard to mean keratometry (D 0.07 ± 0.03 D; p=0.0065) and anterior chamber depth (D 0.08 ± 0.01 mm; p<0.001). In the analysis of covariance, the following differences were obtained using the Haigis' formula when confronted with the biometric values obtained by inserting keratometry and anterior chamber depth values, respectively: Penta/IOL x IOL/Penta (0.13 ± 0.03; p<0.0001); Penta/Penta × IOL/Penta (0.13 ± 0.03; p<0.0001); Penta/IOL × IOL/IOL (0.11 ± 0.03; p=0.001); Penta/Penta × IOL/IOL (0.11 ± 0.03; p=0.002); IOL/IOL × IOL/Penta (0.02 ± 0.03; p=0.865); and Penta/IOL × Penta/Penta (0.002 ± 0.03; p=0.99). The difference was smaller when measuring the anterior chamber depth using the IOLMaster 500, regardless of which device was used to measure keratometry. Conclusions: Pentacam HR significantly differed from IOLMaster 500 when calculating keratometry. As regards the anterior chamber depth, the two devices were equally accurate.

RESUMO Objetivo: Comparar a previsibilidade refrativa pós-operatória do IOLMaster 500 e Pentacam HR com base nos valores de ceratometria e profundidade de câmara anterior nos olhos com indicação de implante de lentes intraoculares multifocais. Métodos: Estudo retrospectivo realizado em 118 olhos tratados com facoemulsificação e implante de lentes intraoculares multifocal. Apenas os olhos que atingiram a emetropia na refração dinâmica no 30º dia pós-operatório foram incluídos. A fórmula de Haigis foi usada em cada caso para calcular o poder das lentes intraoculares, e a lente intraocular com a refração alvo mais próxima da emetropia foi implantada. Cenários de cálculo de quatro lentes foram testados pela combinação de medidas de ceratometria e profundidade de câmara anterior obtidas usando os dois dispositivos. Resultados: IOLMaster 500 e Pentacam HR diferiram quanto à média de ceratometria (D 0,07 ± 0,03 D; p=0,0065) e profundidade de câmara anterior (D 0,08 ± 0,01 mm; p<0,001). Na análise da covariância, as seguintes diferenças foram obtidas usando a fórmula de Haigis quando confrontadas com os valores biométricos obtidos pela inserção dos valores de ceratometria e profundidade de câmara anterior, respectivamente: Penta/IOL x IOL/Penta (0,13 ± 0,03; p<0,0001); Penta/Penta x IOL/Penta (0,13 ± 0,03; p<0,0001); Penta/IOL x IOL/IOL (0,11 ± 0,03; p=0,001); Penta/Penta x IOL/IOL (0,11 ± 0,03; p=0,002); IOL/IOL x IOL/Penta (0,02 ± 0,03; p=0,865); Penta/IOL x Penta/Penta (0,002 ± 0,03; p=0,99). A diferença foi menor ao medir a profundidade da câmara anterior usando o IOLMaster 500, independentemente de qual dispositivo foi usado para medir a ceratometria. Conclusões: O Pentacam HR diferiu significativamente do IOLMaster 500 no cálculo de ceratometria. Quanto à profundidade da câmara anterior, os dois dispositivos foram igualmente precisos.

Effects of Bifocal versus Trifocal Diffractive Intraocular Lens Implantation on Visual Quality after Cataract Surgery

PURPOSE: To compare the effects of bifocal versus trifocal diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) implantation on visual quality after phacoemulsification in patients with cataracts. METHODS: Eighty-eight eyes from 63 patients were analyzed. Trifocal (AT LISA tri 839MP), bifocal (AcrySof IQ ReSTOR) and bifocal (Tecnis MF ZLB00) IOLs were implanted into 53, 18, and 17 eyes, respectively. Uncorrected distance, intermediate and near visual acuity, refractive errors, contrast sensitivity, and patient satisfaction were measured at 1 week and 1 month after surgery. Refractive error was converted to a spherical equivalent and compared to predicted refraction calculated by IOL calculation formulas. RESULTS: Uncorrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity did not differ significantly between groups. One month after surgery, the mean refractive errors were −0.07 diopters (D) in the AT LISA tri 839MP group, +0.18 D in the AcrySof IQ ReSTOR group, and +0.31 D in the Tecnis MF ZLB00 group (p < 0.001). The predictive accuracy of IOL calculation formulas did not differ between groups. Contrast sensitivity, satisfaction, and spectacle independence in the trifocal group were comparable with those of the two bifocal groups. CONCLUSIONS: Trifocal IOL and two different types of bifocal IOL implantation were all effective for improving visual quality, although refractive error in patients with trifocal IOL shows myopic tendencies.

Clinical outcomes of currently available multifocal intraocular lenses

This study investigates the characteristics and clinical outcomes of different types of extended depth-of-focus and multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) to determine which IOL can increase patient satisfaction. Modern cataract surgery has undergone tremendous evolution in terms of IOL quality. Recently, different types of presbyopia-correcting IOLs have become commercially available. Among them, multifocal IOLs are the most frequently used. Multifocal IOLs are different from conventional monofocal IOLs because these have multiple focus, which enable patients to see both distant and near objects at the same time. Multifocal IOLs can be classified as either refractive or diffractive IOLs. Diffractive multifocal IOLs include traditional bifocal lenses and relatively new trifocal lenses, and are the most widely used multifocal IOLs owing to their good clinical performance. Trifocal IOLs have an advantage over bifocal IOLs in terms of intermediate visual acuity, but can cause decreased contrast sensitivity and night vision disturbances. Recently developed extended depth-of-focus IOLs are different from traditional multifocal IOLs in that these extend the focus, resulting in smooth continuous focus. It also has the benefit of better contrast sensitivity and improved visual quality over multifocal IOLs; however, is relatively weak in terms of near visual acuity.

Surgical treatment of presbyopia II

This review gives an overview of the current multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) landscape, in terms of the technology, benefits, and limitations of different premium IOLs, as well as significant clinical outcomes. Cataract is the most common cause of visual impairment in older adults. From 1980, the number of blind and visually impaired people have decreased due to cataract surgery. As the number of surgical procedures increases every year, patient demands have also changed with many patients expecting excellent visual acuity without glasses. Multifocal IOLs can provide spectacle-independence for near, intermediate, and distant vision tasks. Multifocal IOLs can be classified into bifocal, trifocal, and extended depth of focus multifocal IOLs. The ultimate goal of multifocal lenses includes reduced incidence of photic phenomena, and improved uncorrected near, intermediate, and far visual acuities for those working with computers and smartphones, as well as no contrast sensitivity loss. Although some patients have issues with halos and glare, overall patient satisfaction and quality of life are generally high after multifocal IOL implantation. Careful patient selection should be made to satisfy different individual needs.

Comparison of the visual performance of multifocal intraocular lens and monofocal intraocular lens / 国际眼科杂志(Guoji Yanke Zazhi)

@#AIM: To compare the visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and visual quality of cataract patients after the implantation of AT LISA tri 839MP multifocal intraocular lenses and CT SPHERIS 209M monofocal intraocular lenses.<p>METHODS: Fifty-two patients(52 eyes)were involved and divided into two groups in the study. The trail group(26 patients, 26 eyes)received AT LISA tri 839MP multifocal intraocular lens implantation and the control group(26 patients, 26 eyes)received CT SPHERIS 209M monofocal intraocular lens implantation after phacoemulsification. Visual acuity, contrast sensivity at different spatial frequencies(3, 6, 12, 18c/d)in bright and dark circumstances and patient satisfaction questionnaire were monitored at 3mo postoperatively. The postoperative visual acuity included the information of uncorrected distance visual acuity(UCDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity(UCIVA), best corrected distance visual acuity(BCDVA), distance corrected intermediate visual acuity(DCIVA)and distance corrected near visual acuity(DCNVA).<p>RESULTS: The UCIVA, UCNVA, DCIVA, DCNVA, independent spectacles ratio and satisfaction of the trail group were better than those of the control group 3mo postoper atire(<i>P</i><0.05). Mean contrast sensitivity at the spatial frequency of 18c/d in dark circumstances of the control group was higher than that of the trail group(<i>P</i>=0.041). The incidence of glare and halo showed no significantly statistical difference between the two groups(<i>P</i>=0.668).<p>CONCLUSION: AT LISA tri 839MP multifocal intraocular lens provided better intermediate and near visual acuity, independent spectacles ratio and satisfaction compared with CT SPHERIS 209M monofocal intraocular lens.

Ângulos visuais: Artigo sobre a importância para o Implante de Lentes Intraoculares Multifocais / Visual angles: Article on the importance of Multifocal Intraocular Lenses Implantation

Resumo Objetivos: Medir o ângulo lâmbda (AL) em indivíduos no pré-operatório de facectomias, correlacionando a sua presença com o comprimento axial e o esférico dos olhos. Sugerir condutas para o implante de LIO multifocal de acordo com a presença do ângulo lâmbda. Métodos: Estudo transversal em 128 olhos de 74 indivíduos candidatos à cirurgia de catarata para registrar a equivalente presença do ângulo lâmbda. Resultados: Avaliando o ângulo lâmbda observou-se uma correlação positiva (r= 0,559 / p= 0,000) para o tamanho desse ângulo comparando-se os dois olhos. Não houve correlação entre o tamanho do ângulo lâmbda e o equivalente esférico no olho direito (r= -0,027 / p= 0,840), mas foi verificada correlação positiva para o olho esquerdo (r= 0,313 / p= 0,013). A presença da hipermetropia correlacionou com os comprimentos axiais pequenos, assim como a miopia com os grandes. Observou-se correlação negativa entre o tamanho do ângulo lâmbda e o comprimento axial para os dois olhos, sendo de r= -0,249 para o olho direito (p= 0,042) e r= -0,281 para o olho esquerdo (p= 0,018) Conclusões: Houve correlação entre a presença de ângulo lâmbda maior e comprimentos axiais menores para os dois olhos. Para o equivalente esférico hipermétrope houve correlação com a presença de um ângulo lâmbda maior apenas para o olho esquerdo. Esse trabalho sugere parcimônia nos implantes de LIO multifocal na presença de ângulo lâmbda significativo, baseado na teoria que a presença desse ângulo é reguladora do equilíbrio entre as aberrações da superfície corneana versus cristalineanas.

Abstract Objectives: To measure the labral angle (LA) in individuals in the preoperative period of facectomies, correlating their presence with axial length and spherical equivalent of the eyes. Suggest conduits for the implantation of multifocal IOL according to the presence of the lambda angle. Methods: A cross-sectional study of 128 eyes of 74 individuals who were candidates for cataract surgery to record the presence of the lambda angle. Results: A positive correlation (r = 0.559 / p = 0.000) was observed for the angle of this angle by comparing the two eyes. There was no correlation between the size of the lambda angle and the spherical equivalent in the right eye (r = -0.027 / p = 0.840), but a positive correlation was observed for the left eye (r = 0.313 / p = 0.013). The presence of hyperopia correlated with small axial lengths, as did myopia with large ones. There was a negative correlation between the angle of the tongue and the axial length of the two eyes, with r = -0.249 for the right eye (p = 0.042) and = 0.281 for the left eye (p = 0.018). Conclusions: There was a correlation between the presence of a larger lambda angle and smaller axial lengths for both eyes. For the spherical hypermétrope equivalent, there was a correlation with the presence of a larger blunt angle only for the left eye. This work suggests parsimony in multifocal IOL implants in the presence of a significant lamella angle, based on the theory that the presence of this angle regulates the balance between corneal versus crystaline surface aberrations.

Comparison of quality of life following unilateral or bilateral Symfony implantation / 国际眼科杂志(Guoji Yanke Zazhi)

@#AIM: To compare the postoperative quality of life between patients who underwent binocular and unilateral Symfony continuous-vision intraocular lens(IOL)implantation. <p>METHODS: A population-based cross-sectional study was performed. The visual function-related quality of life(QoL)was evaluated with the National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-25(NEI VFQ-25)which was developed by the National Eye Institute. Thirty patients(60 eyes)who underwent phacoemulsification combined with IOL implantation from March 2017 to March 2018 were divided into two groups according to the type of implanted IOL. For bilateral group(36 eyes in 18 cases), patients accepted TECNIS Symfony(ZXR00, AMO)in both eyes. For unilateral group(24 eyes in 12 cases), patients accepted TECNIS Symfony(ZXR00, AMO)in one eye and an aspherical monofocal IOL(PCB00,AMO)in the other eye. Follow-up was performed 3-6mo after surgery. Postoperative binocular uncorrected distant, intermediate and near visual acuity(bUCDVA, bUCIVA and bUCNVA)were compared and the quality of life was evaluated for every patient. <p>RESULTS:There were no statistical differences in bUCDVA, bUCIVA and bUCNVA between two groups(<i>P</i>>0.05). There was no significant difference in composite scores of the NEI VFQ-25 questionnaire between bilateral group and unilateral group(88.95±4.01 <i>vs</i> 88.99±4.22, <i>t</i>=-0.025, <i>P</i>=0.980). A comparison of the 12 scales acquired from the questionnaire showed that there were no statistical differences in visual function-related quality of life in the two groups(<i>P</i>>0.05). <p>CONCLUSION:Compared with bilateral implantation of ZXR00, the patients with the implantation of ZXR00 in one eye and PCB00 in the other eye share the excellent binocular uncorrected distant, intermediate and near visual acuity and postoperative quality of life. For patients who have undergone monofocal IOL implantation in one eye or whose one eye is not suitable for multifocal IOLs, unilateral implantation of Symfony continuous-vision IOL is feasible to meet patients' need for spectacle independency.

Lentes multifocales: una buena opción en la cirugía de catarata / Multifocal lenses: a good choice for the cataract surgery

La introducción de las lentes intraoculares multifocales en el mercado significó un cambio radical en la cirugía de la catarata. La evolución y el desarrollo de este tipo de lentes revelan múltiples opciones para su uso. La difusión de información científica, junto con una mayor exigencia en los resultados por parte de los pacientes, impulsa a los oftalmólogos a modificar su práctica diaria para brindar opciones que satisfagan esta demanda. El objetivo de este trabajo es exponer las características, ventajas, inconvenientes e indicaciones de las lentes intraoculares multifocales que se implantan en la actualidad, así como la orientación hacia un manejo personalizado a cada tipo de pacientes. Se realizó una búsqueda en la plataforma de Infomed sobre diversas publicaciones en los últimos diez años para profundizar en el conocimiento de las características e indicaciones de los lentes intraoculares multifocales y la cirugía premium en catarata(AU)

The introduction of multifocal intraocular lenses on the market brought a radical change in the cataract surgery. The development of these types of lenses reveals multiple choices for their use. The dissemination of scientific information together with greater demand on the results by the patients encourages ophthalmologists to modify their daily practice to offer alternatives that may meet this demand. The objective of this paper was to present the characteristics, advantages, disadvantages and indications of the multifocal intraocular lenses that are currently in use as well as to guide specialists to provide customized management for each type of patients. A search of various publications in the last ten years was made to deepen the knowledge on the characteristics and indications of multifocal intraocular lenses and premium cataract surgery(AU)

Meta - analysis of clinical randomized controlled trials comparing ReZOOM with ReSTOR multifocal intraocular lenses in cataract surgery / 国际眼科杂志(Guoji Yanke Zazhi)

AIM: To systematic review the effectiveness of refractive multifocal intraocular lens ( MIOL ) ReZOOM vs diffractive MIOL ReSTOR in the treatment of cataract. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials comparing refractive MIOL ReZOOM with diffractive MIOL ReSTOR were identified by searching CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMbase, WANFANG MED ONLINE, CMJD, SinoMed, and CNKI. Related journals also were hand-searched. Methodological quality of randomized controlled trials ( RCTs ) was evaluated by simple evaluate method that recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. Data extracted by two reviewers with designed extraction form. RevMan software ( release 5. 2 ) was used for data management and analysis. RESULTS:A total of 7 trials (846 eyes) were included for systematic review. Subgroup analyses were used according to different model comparison of ReSTOR MIOL. The results showed a significant difference in the mean of the best distance corrected intermediate visual acuity ( BDCIVA) in the ReZOOM MIOL group with WMD=-0.11, 95% CI (-0.16, -0.06) (P CONCLUSION: Patients implanted with ReZOOM MIOL can provide better BDCIVA; patients implanted with ReSTOR MIOL show better UCNVA, are less likely to appear light halo, glare and other visual adverse reactions; correction in spectacles cases, patients implanted with ReZOOM or ReSTOR MIOL have considerable performances in the far and near visual acuity.

Wavefront analysis and modulation transfer function of three multifocal intraocular lenses.

Purpose: To evaluate wavefront performance and modulation transfer function (MTF) in the human eye after the implantation of diffractive or refractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). Materials and Methods: This was a prospective, interventional, comparative, nonrandomized clinical study. Uncorrected distance and near visual acuity, and wavefront analysis including MTF curves (iTrace aberrometer, Tracey Technologies, Houston, TX, USA) were measured in 60 patients after bilateral IOL implantation with 6 months of follow-up. Forty eyes received the diffractive ReSTOR (Alcon), 40 eyes received the refractive ReZoom (Advanced Medical Optics) and 40 eyes, the Tecnis ZM900 (Advanced Medical Optics). The comparison of MTF and aberration between the intraocular lenses was performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by the Dunn test when necessary. Results: The mean uncorrected distance visual acuity was similar in all three groups of multifocal IOLs. The ReSTOR group provided better uncorrected near visual acuity than the ReZoom group (P < 0.001), but similar to the Tecnis group. Spherical aberration was significantly higher in the ReZoom group (P = 0.007). Similar MTF curves were found for the aspheric multifocal IOL Tecnis and the spheric multifocal IOL ReSTOR, and both performed better than the multifocal IOL ReZoom in a 5 mm pupil (P < 0.001 at all spatial frequencies). Conclusions: Diffractive IOLs studied presented similar MTF curves for a 5 mm pupil diameter. Both diffractive IOLs showed similar spherical aberration, which was significantly better with the full-diffractive IOL Tecnis than with the refractive IOL ReZoom.

A contralateral eye study comparing apodized diffrative and full diffrative lenses: wavefront analysis and distance and near uncorrected visual acuity

PURPOSE: To evaluate intraindividual visual acuity, wavefront errors and modulation transfer functions in patients implanted with two diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses. METHODS: This prospective study examined 40 eyes of 20 cataract patients who underwent phacoemulsification and implantation of a spherical multifocal ReSTOR intraocular lens in one eye and an aspheric Tecnis ZM900 multifocal intraocular lens in the other eye. The main outcome measures, over a 3-month follow-up period, were the uncorrected photopic distance and near visual acuity and the defocus curve. The visual acuity was converted to logMAR for statistical analysis and is presented in decimal scale. The wavefront error and modulation transfer function were also evaluated in both groups. RESULTS: At the 3-month postoperative visit, the mean photopic distance uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) was 0.74 ± 0.20 in the ReSTOR group and 0.76 ± 0.22 in the Tecnis group (p=0.286). The mean near UCVA was 0.96 ± 0.10 in the ReSTOR group and 0.93 ± 0.14 in the Tecnis group (p=0.963). The binocular defocus curve showed measurements between the peaks better than 0.2 logMAR. The total aberration, higher-order aberration and coma aberration were not significantly different between the groups. The spherical aberration was significantly lower in the Tecnis group than in the ReSTOR group. (p=0.004). Both groups performed similarly for the modulation transfer function. CONCLUSION: The ReSTOR SN60D3 and Tecnis ZM 900 intraocular lenses provided similar photopic visual acuity at distance and near. The diffractive intraocular lenses studied provided a low value of coma and spherical aberrations, with the Tecnis intraocular lens having a statistically lower spherical aberration compared to the ReSTOR intraocular lens. In the 5 mm pupil diameter analyses, both intraocular lens groups showed similar modulation transfer functions.