Quantitative biometric cutoffs for the choice of the intraocular lens power calculation formula for a recently introduced nondiffractive extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to analyze biometry values cutoffs for the choice of the best intraocular lens power calculation formula for AcrySof IQ Vivity intraocular lens. METHODS: The study was designed as interventional case series with 3 months of follow-up. Intraocular lens power calculation formulas included Barrett Universal II and SRK/T. The first was adopted for the intraocular lens power choice. The quantitative analysis focused on the identification of specific biometric cutoffs considering axial length, anterior chamber depth, and corneal powers. We included only the dominant eye in the statistical analysis. RESULTS: One hundred and eight eyes of 54 patients (23 males; mean age 62 ± 5 years) with no ocular diseases were included. Best-corrected visual acuity improved from 0.3 ± 0.2 to 0.0 ± 0.0 logMAR. All the eyes reached spectacles-free far and intermediate visions; a spherical addition of + 1.0D was necessary to adjust near vision. We identified significant quantitative cutoffs based on axial length and anterior chamber depth. Barrett Universal II resulted the best formula for eyes disclosing an axial length >25 mm, whereas SRK/T turned out to be the best choice for the eyes characterized by an anterior chamber depth <2.8 mm. Our analysis disclosed an overall sensitivity of 0.8 and a specificity of 0.7 (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Axial length and anterior chamber depth influence the choice of Barrett Universal II and SRK/T formulas. Quantitative biometric cutoffs may be useful to discriminate the best formula to be adopted.

Extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) AcrySof® IQ Vivity® intraocular lens implant: a real-life experience.

PURPOSE: Extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) is a promising intraocular lens (IOL) technology for cataract surgery. The aim of the study was to report the real-life experience related to the implant of EDOF AcrySof® IQ Vivity® (Alcon Inc., USA) IOL. METHODS: The study was designed as a interventional, prospective, case series with 3 months of follow-up. Patients needing cataract surgery, without any other kind of ocular diseases, were recruited and implanted with AcrySof® IQ Vivity® IOL. We evaluated the refractive success of this IOL through complete ophthalmologic assessments and the administration of the Quality of Vision test. The main outcome measures were the refractive outcome; far, intermediate, and near vision; and Quality of Vision score. RESULTS: We included 108 eyes (54 patients; age 62 ± 5 years). Intra-operative and post-operative complications were 0%. Thirty out of 100 eyes (28%) required toric IOL. Best-corrected visual acuity improved from 0.4 ± 0.3 LogMAR to 0.0 ± 0.0 LogMAR (p < 0.01). Refractive outcome was very good for far and intermediate visions, whereas a spherical addition of at least + 1.0D was required for near vision. The mean Quality of Vision score was of 15.5 ± 6.5. The most complained visual disturbances were haloes and glares, although resulting well-tolerated. Dynamic pupillometry findings well-correlated with the amount of complained post-operative visual discomforts. CONCLUSIONS: AcrySof® IQ Vivity® IOL is a well-tolerated choice to correct far and intermediate vision. Spectacles are needed to optimize near vision. Our data strongly suggest dynamic pupillometry as a useful investigation to optimize post-operative refractive success.

Diabetic macular edema, innovative technologies and economic impact: New opportunities for the Lombardy Region healthcare system?

PURPOSE: Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a leading cause of vision loss and blindness. The aim of this study was to evaluate the economic benefits of introducing additional alternative technologies (Dexamethasone intravitreal implant - DEX - and Aflibercept injections), compared with the historical scenario of Ranibizumab intravitreal injections. METHODS: A 3-year budget impact model was developed, taking into consideration the perspective of the Lombardy Region Healthcare Service (LRHS). Total administration costs (real-life data retrieved from clinical practice at three Departments of Ophthalmology) as well as costs related to the management of potential adverse events (information collected from the literature) were analysed. RESULTS: Over a 36-month horizon, the results showed that a higher consumption of DEX could lead to significant economic savings for the Regional Healthcare Service, ranging from a minimum of -4.35% (if DEX were used only in the second-line of treatment) to a maximum of -12.97% (if DEX were used in both the first-line and second-line), including the potential impact of adverse events. Therapy costs with Aflibercept and Ranibizumab were similar. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that concentrating all eligible patients within the Ranibizumab regimen is unlikely to represent a cost-effective strategy. Indeed, significant economic advantages would be achieved by introducing the other licensed alternatives, Dexamethasone implant and Aflibercept, thus optimising DME Italian healthcare expenditure. The results demonstrate DEX as an advantageous technological alternative for the target population affected by DME, both as a first- and second-line treatment option, reducing the economic burden of the pathology for the Regional/National Health Service.

Sickle cell-hemoglobin C retinopathy: transient obstruction of retinal and choroidal circulations and transient drying out of retinal neovessels.

We present a case of sickle cell-hemoglobin C disease that presented acute retinal and choroidal peripheral non-perfusion on the base of chronic microvascular obstruction, which transiently closed retinal neovessels.