[Overview of intraocular lenses with optics for correcting presbyopia]. / Übersicht über Intraokularlinsen mit Presbyopie-korrigierenden Optiken.

BACKGROUND: In recent years intraocular lenses (IOLs) for correcting presbyopia have been significantly improved and diversified. There are currently many different IOL models based on a wide variety of optical designs. OBJECTIVE: The wide variety of available IOL solutions to correct presbyopia can be challenging for surgeons and patients. In everyday practice, the question is which IOL is best for which patient. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This overview describes and categorizes the currently available implants. The respective optical properties are analyzed and clinical study results are discussed, in particular those evaluating visual performance and the occurrence of photic phenomena. RESULTS: Monofocal-plus IOLs provide improved intermediate visual acuity with optimal distant visual acuity and minimal photic phenomena. Extended depth of field (EDoF) IOLs extend the depth of field through different optical principles and provide good distant and intermediate visual acuity. Trifocal lenses enable the greatest independence from spectacles at the price of a higher probability of dysphotopsia. CONCLUSION: The selection of the most suitable IOL for correction of presbyopia requires a balance between the patient's visual needs and possible side effects. An adequate knowledge of the currently available implants allows a patient-oriented selection of IOLs.

[Optical benchtop evaluation of special intraocular lens optics]. / Optische Bank-Evaluierung für spezielle Intraokularlinsenoptiken.

Intraocular lenses (IOL) featuring complex optical designs can pose a challenge in understanding their performance, which may hinder making an informed decision when selecting suitable lenses for patients. This underlines the importance of collecting optical quality data of IOLs and making them available. The deployment of benchtop systems for IOL testing offers not only insights into the design features of various IOL solutions but also provides a platform for objective comparisons of special optics designs, including information about their susceptibility to photic phenomena. Recent advances in IOL testing have improved the ability to predict functional effects on visual acuity and contrast sensitivity from objective optical quality metrics. This, for instance, can be used to study monofocal lenses and the impact of asphericity on vision and IOLs tolerance to misalignment. Monofocal-plus IOLs consistently show only a slight improvement in the depth of focus when tested on the optical bench and in clinical settings. Although the pupil dependence found in this technology may limit the advantages of monofocal-plus over standard monofocal technology to extend the range of vision, it is the key to reduce photic phenomena. Refractive and diffractive extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOLs can effectively enhance intermediate vision, with the latter offering a slightly broader depth of focus but potentially increasing the risk of dysphotopsia. However, the limitation of EDOF IOLs is that they often fail to deliver spectacle independence for reading, which can be overcome by trifocal technology. Still, the available trifocal IOLs differ in their location of intermediate and near foci and the susceptibility to produce glare effects. Therefore, the knowledge from optical benchtop testing of IOLs can support optimizing the IOL selection by aligning the patient's visual needs with the IOL's properties, setting the right expectations, and assessing the risk profile for the occurrence of photic phenomena, potentially leading to improved decision-making.

Fellow-Eye Comparison Of Monocular Visual Outcomes Following Monofocal EDOF And Trifocal EDOF IOL Implantation.

PURPOSE: To compare intraindividual monocular visual performance of a monofocal EDOF and a trifocal EDOF IOL following bilateral cataract surgery. DESIGN: Single-center, prospective, fellow-eye comparison clinical trial. METHODS: All patients received uneventful bilateral cataract surgery with implantation of the monofocal EDOF Isopure IOL in the dominant eye and the trifocal EDOF FineVision Triumf IOL in the non-dominant eye. Intraindividual monocular comparison included visual acuity at various distances, defocus curves, internal total higher-order aberration (HOA), spherical aberration (SA) Z(4.0), IOL decentration and tilt. Additionally, subjective outcomes were evaluated using Halo and Glare simulation and the VF-7 questionnaire. RESULTS: In total, 25 patients (50 eyes) were included. Intraindividual monocular BCDVA, DCIVA, and BCNVA were comparable (p> .05). However, monocular contrast acuity (p= .019), DCNVA (p< .001) and defocus curves at defocus levels of 0.0D (p= .005) and between -1.5 and -4.0D (p< .001) differed significantly. At 5mm, internal HOA and SA Z(4.0) were significantly different (p< .001) and comparable at 3mm pupil diameter, as were IOL tilt and decentration (p> .05). CONCLUSION: In this combined fellow-eye comparison, near vision was significantly better with the trifocal EDOF IOL. The monofocal EDOF IOL demonstrated similar distance and intermediate visual performance as the trifocal EDOF IOL. Overall, low values of photic phenomena and visual impairment was observed.

Visual Function After Implantation of Trifocal and Trifocal Toric Intraocular Lenses Using Intraoperative Aberrometry.

Purpose: To evaluate patient outcomes and visual function following trifocal and trifocal toric intraocular lens (IOL) implantation using intraoperative aberrometry at a single site in the US. Methods: This prospective, single arm study included 21 subjects that completed 3 month follow-up. Inclusion criteria were visually significant cataract and potential post-operative visual acuity of 20/25 or better. Endpoints included postoperative prediction error, refractive outcomes, uncorrected visual acuities at distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA), and near (UNVA), contrast sensitivity, and subject responses on the modified Visual Function Quality of Life Questionnaire (VF-14 QOL). Results: Binocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA were 20/25 or better in 100% (21/21), 100% (21/21), 90% (19/21) of subjects. The absolute prediction error was 0.50 D or less in 79% (33/42) of eyes, and 81% (34/42) and 86% (36/42) of eyes achieved ≤0.5 D of residual astigmatism and manifest refraction spherical equivalent, respectively. On the modified VF-14 QOL, driving at night, reading small print, and reading a newspaper or book were the tasks that had the lowest percentages of subjects reporting no difficulty or a little difficulty. Conclusion: Implantation with trifocal and trifocal toric IOLs using intraoperative aberrometry can provide high refractive precision, leading to excellent visual performance and low visual task difficulty at all ranges (distance, intermediate, and near).

An intraocular lens (IOL) is a clear artificial lens that can be used to replace the natural lens in the eye when the natural lens becomes opaque (develops a cataract). Monofocal IOLs are designed to provide good vision to see distant objects; however, spectacles may still be needed to see objects clearly up close (such as reading a book or using a digital device). Trifocal IOLs are designed to provide good vision to see objects at distance and up close, however, the power of the IOL must be accurately determined for the best visual outcomes. Devices called biometers are used by cataract surgeons to measure the eye and determine the most appropriate lens power to implant. Most biometers are used prior to surgery, however one type, intraoperative aberrometry (IA), can be used during surgery to measure the eye and determine the most appropriate lens power. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient outcomes and visual function following trifocal IOL implantation using IA. The results of this study suggest that implantation with trifocal IOLs using IA can provide high refractive accuracy and excellent visual outcomes.

Effectivity and safety of trifocal intraocular lenses and capsular tension rings implantation for cataract patients with axial high myopia.

AIM: To assess effectivity and safety of trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and capsular tension rings in treating cataract patients with axial high myopia. METHODS: A prospective nonrandomized controlled clinical trial was conducted. Totally 98 eyes (74 patients) who underwent femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) with trifocal IOLs were enrolled in the study and followed up for 2y after surgery: 46 eyes (33 patients) with capsular tension ring implantation in the long axial lengths (AL) group (260.05). The dysfunctional lens index and total modulation transfer function (MTF) average height were similar between the two groups. The postoperative internal coma aberrations in the axial high myopia eyes were significantly higher than that in the normal AL group (P<0.05). The total satisfaction score in the long AL group (91.32±2.76) was slightly higher than that in the normal AL group (90.36±3.47), but there was no difference (P=0.136). A statistically negative correlation was found between corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) and dysfunctional lens index (r=-0.382, P=0.009), and between CDVA and the total MTF average height (r=-0.374, P=0.01). But there was no significant correlation between CDVA and total satisfaction score (r=0.059, P=0.696). Postoperative complications mainly presented as posterior capsular opacity (PCO), retinal detachment and cystoid macular edema. There was no difference in the incidence of fundus disease (6.5% vs 3.8%, P=0.663) or PCO (17.4% vs 7.7%, P=0.217) between the two groups at two years. CONCLUSION: The utilization of trifocal IOL and capsular tension ring implantation is beneficial for cataract patients with axial high myopia undergoing FLACS. This approach not only ensures excellent subjective feelings and objective visual quality, but also does not increase the incidence of postoperative complications.

Refractive and Visual Outcomes Using a Trifocal, Diffractive, Hydrophobic Intraocular Lens in Japanese Eyes.

Purpose: To report the refractive and visual outcomes after implantation of a trifocal, diffractive, hydrophobic intraocular lens (IOL) in Japanese eyes following cataract surgery. Methods: A total of 45 eyes implanted with FineVision HP IOLs (Beaver-Visitec International, Inc. USA) were enrolled in this retrospective study. The clinical outcomes assessed after 3-months were refraction and monocular logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (LogMAR) uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA) at 80 and 66 cm, uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), and distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) at 40 cm. Results: 97.78% of the eyes were within ±0.50D of spherical equivalent and all of them were within ±1.00D (mean: -0.00±0.22 D, with 75.56% within ±0.13D), while 91.11% of the eyes had ≤0.50D residual astigmatism and all of them had ≤1.00D (mean: -0.08±0.24D, with 88.89% ≤0.25D). UDVA and CDVA showed mean values of -0.05±0.07 logMAR and -0.07±0.06 logMAR, respectively. 86.67% and 95.56% of the eyes had ≥20/20 UDVA and CDVA, respectively, with 100% achieving ≥20/25 for both UDVA and CDVA. At 80 cm, the mean monocular logMAR UIVA and DCIVA were 0.18±0.14 and 0.14±0.14, and at 66 cm the values were 0.20±0.15 and 0.19±0.15, respectively. At 80 cm 20% of the eyes had ≥20/25 DCIVA and 60% had ≥20/32 DCIVA. These values changed to 15.56% and 40% of the eyes at 66 cm. In terms of near vision, the mean monocular logMAR UNVA and DCNVA were 0.04±0.10 and 0.03±0.10, respectively. 53.33% of the eyes had ≥20/20 UNVA and DCNVA, with 86.67% achieving ≥20/25 UNVA and DCNVA. Conclusion: The FineVision HP trifocal diffractive IOL provided accurate refractive outcomes with good visual acuity at different distances in Japanese eyes.

Visual Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction of Trifocal or Trifocal Toric IOLs in Chinese Cataract Patients: Focus on Near Vision at 33 cm.

Purpose: To examine the visual outcomes, particularly at 33 cm, and assess patient satisfaction following the implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) and its toric variant. Patients and Methods: This prospective single-arm observational study involved 45 Chinese patients (90 eyes) underwent bilateral cataract surgery and PanOptix or PanOptix toric intraocular lenses (IOLs) implantation. Postoperatively, visual acuity was evaluated at various distances, including 40 cm and 33 cm, for both monocular and binocular outcomes. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using the VF-14 questionnaire. Results: 72 eyes underwent PanOptix IOLs implantation, and 18 eyes received PanOptix toric IOLs. At 3-month postoperative mark, the mean monocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA at 40 cm and 33 cm were -0.02±0.09, 0.00±0.07, 0.02±0.07, and 0.07±0.14 logMAR, respectively, with proportions of visual acuity exceeding 0.1 logMAR were 96.7%, 96.7%, 94.4%, and 74.4%, respectively. The mean binocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA at 40 cm and 33 cm were -0.05±0.06, -0.03±0.05, 0.00±0.05, and 0.04±0.07 logMAR, respectively, with proportions of visual acuity exceeding 0.1 logMAR were 97.8%, 100.0%, 100.0%, and 91.1%, respectively. When the near point shifted from 40cm to 33cm, some patients showed a decline for UDVA, but the average reduction was less than one line. The overall VF-14 questionnaire score was 4.02±4.19. Conclusion: PanOptix can provide Chinese patients with a full range of satisfying visual acuity, near to 33cm. Though the visual acuity of some patients at 33 cm did not match the level at 40 cm, the gap of one line may not carry clinical significant.

Visual and Refractive Outcomes of a New Hydrophobic Trifocal Toric Intraocular Lens.

Purpose: To evaluate the visual outcomes and efficacy of astigmatism correction using a new hydrophobic trifocal toric intraocular lens (IOL). Methods: This study involved 62 eyes implanted with the FineVision HP Toric IOL. The visual and refractive outcomes were assessed preoperatively and 6 weeks after the surgery. Specifically, monocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) at 80 and 60 cm and uncorrected near visual acuity at (UNVA) at 40 cm were evaluated. The rotational stability of the lens was also assessed. Results: Sixty-one eyes (98.39%) were within ±1.00D and 55 eyes (88.71%) were within ±0.50 D of spherical equivalent, with a mean value of 0.09±0.39 D. 51 (82.26%) and 61 (98.39%) eyes had a UDVA of ≥20/20 and ≥20/25, respectively, and for CDVA these values were as follows: 59 (95.16%) and 62 eyes (100%), respectively. The mean UDVA and CDVA were 0.01±0.06 and -0.01±0.04logMAR, respectively. Greater than or equal to unaided 20/20 vision was achieved at 40 cm in 42 (67.74%), UIVA at 60 cm in 42 (67.74%) and 50 eyes (80.65%) at 80 cm. Those achieving ≥20/25 were 56 (90.32%, 40 cm), 59 (95.16%, 60 cm), and 62 eyes (100%, 80 cm). Postoperative mean values were 0.04±0.07, 0.03±0.07, and 0.00±0.07logMAR for UCNVA, UIVA at 60 cm, and UIVA at 80 cm, respectively. The mean rotation of the IOL was 5.8 degrees. Conclusion: This hydrophobic trifocal toric IOL provides good refractive outcomes with excellent visual acuity across multiple distances, providing a full range of focus.

Customizing Clinical Outcomes with Implantation of Two Diffractive Trifocal IOLs of Identical Design but Differing Light Distributions to the Far, Intermediate and Near Foci.

Purpose: To evaluate clinical outcomes after bilateral or contralateral implantation of the Gemetric™ (G) and Gemetric™ Plus (GPlus) diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, multi-center open-label study comparing clinical results and subjective patient responses around 6 months after implantation of the study lenses (toric and non-toric) in three different groups (bilateral G, bilateral GPlus and contralateral G/GPlus implantation). Results included the manifest refraction, uncorrected and distance corrected monocular and binocular visual acuity (VA) at distance, intermediate and near; the defocus curve; contrast sensitivity; and patient reported outcomes regarding spectacle independence, satisfaction and visual disturbances. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the mean refraction spherical equivalent between the two lens models (p = 0.33) or between the toric and non-toric lenses (p = 0.06). Monocular VA was better at distance with the G lens and better at near with the GPlus lens (p < 0.01). Mean binocular VA was better than 0.1 logMAR at all distances for all groups, both uncorrected and distance corrected. The mean binocular distance corrected VA was better than 0.15 logMAR from 0.0 D to -3.50 D for all groups. All VA data for the contralateral group was as good or better than for the bilateral GPlus group. Questionnaire results showed no difference between groups for the frequency, severity, or degree of bother of visual disturbances (p > 0.24). Conclusion: The two diffractive trifocal IOLs studied here may be used either bilaterally or contralaterally for the correction of presbyopia in cataract patients, providing excellent visual acuity with low levels of visual disturbances and high rates of overall spectacle independence. Bilateral Gemetric implantation resulted in slightly better distance and intermediate vision while contralateral implantation provided slightly better near vision. There was no apparent advantage to implanting the GPlus IOL bilaterally.

Comparison of Two Presbyopia-Correcting Trifocal Intraocular Lenses: A Prospective Study.

Objectives: To evaluate the clinical results of a new trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) with sinusoidal design by comparing with a traditional trifocal IOL. Materials and Methods: A total of 79 patients undergoing uneventful microincisional cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of one of two types of trifocal IOLs, the Acriva Trinova IOL (VSY) or Acrysof IQ PanOptix IOL (Alcon), were enrolled in this prospective study. Visual and refractive outcomes, contrast sensitivity (CS), and defocus curve were assessed at 3 months after surgery. Patient satisfaction and incidence of photic phenomena were also evaluated. Results: The number of patients/eyes were 48/96 in the Trinova group and 31/62 in the PanOptix group. There were no significant differences between the groups for monocular and binocular corrected/uncorrected distance or intermediate (at 60 cm) and near visual acuities (VA) postoperatively. The Trinova group had statistically significantly better intermediate VA at 80 cm than the PanOptix group (p<0.05). The CS results of both groups were within the normal limits. In the binocular defocus curve of both IOLs, we observed a peak of good VA at 0.0 diopters defocus and a useful wide range for intermediate distances. The incidence of photic phenomena in the Trinova group was lower at postoperative 1 month (p<0.05) but this difference disappeared at 3 months. A total of 47 patients (97.9%) in the Trinova group and 30 patients (96.7%) in the PanOptix group stated that they would recommend the same IOL. Conclusion: Both trifocal IOLs provide good visual quality outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens with phacoemulsification and femtosecond laser assisted cataract surgery.

PURPOSE: To evaluate short-term visual and refractive outcomes after implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) in cataract patients with phacoemulsification (PHACO) and femtosecond laser assisted cataract surgery (FLACS). SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Aier Eye Hospital, China. DESIGN: A retrospective, observational study. METHODS: Patients who underwent cataract surgery combined with Acrysoft IQ PanOptix trifocal IOL implantation were enrolled and divided into three groups: PHACO group, LAstig-FLACS group (astigmatism less then 1D) and HAstig-FLACS group (astigmatism more than 1D). Logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuity of uncorrected distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA), near visual (UNVA), defocus curve, surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) were evaluated in 1 months postoperatively and wavefront aberrations were evaluated in 6 months. RESULTS: 101 eyes of 60 patients were included with 31 eyes in PHACO group, 45 eyes in LAstig-FLACS group and 25 eyes in HAstig-FLACS group. Significant difference was found of internal Strehl Ratio (SR) between PHACO and LAstig-FLACS group (P = 0.026). In PHACO group, 79.31%, 86.21%, 72.41% of eyes gain visual acuity LogMAR 0.1 or more in UDVA, UIVA and UNVA, while 83.72%, 93.02%, 93.02% of those in LAstig-FLACS group and 92.00%, 84.00%, 76.00% in HAstig-FLACS group. CONCLUSIONS: Panoptix diffractive trifocal IOL provides satisfied visual outcome in no matter FLACS or PHACO. Besides, trifocal IOL implantation via FLACS can provide a better accumulative visual acuity outcome at all distance than PHACO in 1 month. Femtosecond laser assisted limbal relaxing incisions (FLLRIs) is an excellent way to reduce a patient's corneal astigmatism.

Clinical Results of a Trifocal Toric Intraocular Lens Using the Holladay Total Surgically Induced Astigmatism Formula for Correcting Low Corneal Astigmatism in Japanese Patients.

Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the AcrySof IQ PanOptix toric intraocular lens (IOL) with cylinder power of 1.0 D (TFNT20) in a Japanese population with low corneal astigmatism and compare with historical control data for nontoric IOLs. Setting: Tokyo Dental College Suidobashi Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. Design: Prospective, single-center study. Methods: Patients ≥20 years old received TFNT20 IOL in at least 1 eye based on Alcon Toric calculator (Holladay Total surgically induced astigmatism). Effectiveness endpoints included the percentage of eyes with refractive cylinder ≤0.25 D at 30-60 days after surgery, which was compared with a historical control threshold rate of 29.2% for nontoric IOLs and refractive cylinder ≤0.50 D. Monocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA; 5 m), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA; 60 cm), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA; 40 cm), and adverse events were evaluated. Results: Of 41 eyes implanted with TFNT20 IOLs, 37 eyes (90%) achieved refractive cylinder ≤0.25 D at 30-60 days after surgery, demonstrating the superiority of TFNT20 compared with historical data (P<0.0001). Refractive cylinder of ≤0.50 D was achieved by 41 eyes (100%). At 30-60 days, mean ± SD monocular CDVA was -0.15 ± 0.07 logMAR, UDVA was -0.09 ± 0.09 logMAR, UIVA was -0.00 ± 0.07 logMAR, and UNVA was 0.03 ± 0.07 logMAR. Six eyes (15%) had elevated postoperative intraocular pressure, which returned to normal and was not device-related. Conclusion: TFNT20 IOLs successfully reduced postoperative refractive cylinder and provided good distance, intermediate, and near uncorrected VAs in Japanese patients with low corneal astigmatism.

Trifocal femur fracture with intracapsular femoral neck, open diaphyseal, and distal complete articular fractures.

We describe a trifocal femur injury with intracapsular femoral neck fracture, diaphyseal fracture with bone loss, and distal complete articular (AO/OTA C type) fracture, an injury rarely described in the literature. Surgical management utilized a not-yet-reported implant combination: screw-side plate device for the intracapsular femoral neck, retrograde nail for the diaphysis, and lag screws plus mini fragment buttress plating for the distal fracture. The patient had uneventful fracture union with no changes in alignment. Given the rarity and complexity of this injury, there is little consensus on surgical technique and implant choice. This case demonstrates a modernized approach that may be useful for surgeons who encounter similar fracture patterns in their practice.

A rare trifocal presentation of a choroid plexus papilloma: Case report and review of the literature.

Introduction: CPP's present as slow-growing intraventricular neoplasms arising from epithelium of choroid plexus. They account for approximately 0.5-4% of intracranial neoplasms in adults and children, respectively. A trifocal presentation is exceedingly rare. Research question: We describe the case of a trifocal presentation of a CPP and explored the importance of genetic analyses. Material and methods: We present the case of an 18-year old adolescent who was treated for a fourth ventricular and suprasellar neoplasm. Brain MRI revealed an intraventricular lesion in the fourth ventricle, as well as a suprasellar lesion and a lesion located in the left internal auditory meatus. An adult-subtype CPP (WHO grade 1) was confirmed by means of histological and genetic analyses in the first two regions. Results: Optimal treatment strategy remains controversial, although it is accepted that surgical resection alone remains the gold standard, whereas chemoradiotherapy is reserved for specific cases. There are only a few articles reporting on a multifocal presentation or the coexistence of synchronous histologically different primary brain neoplasms. Reports on genetic examination are scarce. Discussion and conclusion: CPP's should be included in the differential diagnosis of posterior fossa tumors, both in children and adults. Genetic analyses (TP53/TERT mutations) should be considered, since they entail important diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic implications. When a TERT mutation is present, adjuvant radiotherapy should be used with caution, since it plays a role in tumorigenesis, even when GTR could not be achieved. There is an association between TERT methylation status and malignant transformation, indicating that these patients should be followed more closely.

Tolerance to decentration of biaspheric intraocular lenses with refractive phase-ring extended depth of focus and diffractive trifocal designs.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the in vitro tolerance to decentration of biaspheric intraocular lens (IOLs) with refractive phase-ring extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) and diffractive trifocal designs. METHODS: This experimental study was carried out at the Department of Optics and Optometry and Vision Science, University of Valencia, Spain. The modulation transfer function (MTF) of the ETLIO130C EDOF and the TFLIO130C trifocal IOLs (AST Products Inc., Billerica, MA, USA) were determined at different levels of decentration for a given wavelength and pupil diameter using the PMTF optical bench (Lambda-X Ophthalmics, Nivelles, Belgium). The modulation transfer function (MTF) curves, the through-focus MTF curves, and the Strehl ratios were measured at 3-mm pupil aperture for 0.25-, 0.50- and 0.75-mm decentration. RESULTS: The optical design of the trifocal TFLIO130C IOL is robust to small decentrations, with virtually no change in MTF response for 0.25 mm decentration. For greater decentration levels, the MTF response is slightly reduced with increasing decentration. The ETLIO130C EDOF design is robust to decentration, as the MTF response is only minimally affected when increasing the decentration up to 0.75 mm. CONCLUSIONS: MTF responses are slightly reduced with greater levels of decentration, but the range of focus provided by both trifocal and EDOF designs are preserved. The effects for average levels of decentration reported in the literature are minimum for both IOL designs.

Bilateral Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Clear Lens Extraction with Trifocal Intraocular Lens Implantation for Presbyopia Correction: A Short-Term Observational Study in Chinese Adults.

Purpose: To observe the outcome of bilateral femtosecond laser-assisted clear lens extraction with trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation for presbyopia correction and evaluate its feasibility in early presbyopic adults. Methods: Prospective case series of eyes with clear crystalline lenses that underwent femtosecond laser-assisted lens extraction and trifocal IOL (Acrysof IQ PanOptix, Model TFNT00, Alcon) implantation between 2021 and 2023 were followed up for at least 3 months after surgery. Outcome measures included monocular uncorrected visual acuity at near (UNVA, 40 cm), intermediate (UIVA, 60 cm), and distance (UDVA, 5 m), monocular manifest refraction, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), defocus curve assessment, and spectacle independence at both near and distance. Results: A total of 60 eyes from 30 consecutive patients were included, and their mean age was 50.4±6.5 years. After surgery, the mean UNVA (LogMAR) increased from 0.28±0.16 to 0.08±0.07, UIVA increased from 0.25±0.12 to 0.09±0.06, and UDVA increased from 0.27±0.21 to 0.01±0.08. The enhancements of UNVA, UIVA and UDVA were all significant (P < 0.05). The optometric results showed that the mean postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) was -0.21±0.24 D, and the mean postoperative CDVA (LogMAR) was -0.00±0.06. The preoperative spectacle independences at near and distance were 46.7% (14/30) and 56.7% (17/30), respectively, and both increased to 100% at 3 months after surgery. Conclusion: Satisfactory visual outcomes and safe surgical procedures were observed in this study, which demonstrate that bilateral femtosecond laser-assisted clear lens extraction with PanOptix IOL implantation could be a feasible approach for presbyopia correction in working-age Chinese patients.

Phacoemulsification with implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens in eyes with asteroid hyalosis and synchysis scintillans.

PURPOSE: To compare the visual outcomes in both eyes of patients who undergo phacoemulsification and trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation and have asteroid hyalosis (AH) or synchysis scintillans (SS) in only one eye. METHODS: A retrospective comparative case series was performed. We evaluated uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), predictability, safety, efficacy, and satisfaction after implantation of the same model of trifocal IOL in both eyes (PhysIOL FineVision Pod-F and Micro-F and Rayner RayOne Trifocal). RESULTS: A total of 164 eyes of 82 patients (41 females, 50%) met the inclusion criteria. There were no statistically significant differences in sphere, cylinder, spherical equivalent, UDVA, UIVA, or UNVA between the groups. Postoperative CDVA was slightly better in the control group (logMAR 0.03) than in the AH/SS group (logMAR 0.04) (P: 0.014). There were no statistically significant differences in predictability, safety index, or efficacy index between the groups. Overall subjective satisfaction was good (98.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Visual outcomes and satisfaction are good after implantation of trifocal IOLs in eyes with AH or SS. Therefore, trifocal IOLs should not be ruled out in these patients when no other vitreoretinal disorder is present.

Systematic evaluation of machine learning-enhanced trifocal IOL power selection for axial myopia cataract patients.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate and optimize intraocular lens (IOL) power selection for cataract patients with high axial myopia receiving trifocal IOLs. DESIGN: A multi-center, retrospective observational case series was conducted. Patients having an axial length ≥26 mm and undergoing cataract surgery with trifocal IOL implanted were studied. METHODS: Preoperative biometric and postoperative outcome data from 139 eyes were collected to train and test various machine learning (ML) models (support vector machine, linear regression, and stacking regressor) using five-fold cross-validation. The models' performance was further validated externally using data from 48 eyes enrolled from other hospitals. Performance of seven IOL calculation formulas (BUII, Kane, EVO, K6, DGS, Holladay I, and SRK/T) were examined with and without ML models. RESULTS: The results of cross-validation revealed improvements across all IOL calculation formulas, especially for K6 and Holladay I. The model increased the percentage of eyes with a prediction error (PE) within ±0.50 D from 71.94% to 79.14% for K6, and from 35.25% to 51.80% for Holladay I. In external validation involving 48 patients from other centers, six out of seven formulas demonstrated a reduction in the mean absolute error (MAE). K6's PE within ±0.50 D improved from 62.50% to 77.08%, and Holladay I from 16.67% to 58.33%. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we conducted a comprehensive evaluation of seven IOL power calculation formulas in high axial myopia cases and explored the effectiveness of the Stacking Regressor model in augmenting their accuracy. Of these formulas, K6 and Holladay I exhibited the most significant improvements, suggesting that integrating ML may have varying levels of effectiveness across different formulas but holds substantial promise in improving the predictability of IOL power calculations in patients with long eyes.

Clinical performance and shape analysis of trifocal intraocular lenses via scanning electron microscopy.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate visual performance after implantation of the TFNT (Acrysof Panoptix, Alcon, Fort Worth, Texas, USA) and CNWT (Clareon Panoptix, Alcon, Fort Worth, Texas, USA) intraocular lens (IOL), and compare the lens shape observed by scanning electron microscope (SEM). METHODS: Eighteen patients (18 eyes) received implantation of the CNWT and Twenty patients (20 eyes) received implantation of the TFNT. Exclusion criteria were previous ocular surgeries, ocular pathologies, or corneal abnormalities. Intervention or Observational Procedure(s): Postoperative examination at 1 months including manifest refraction; evaluation of refractive error, distance-corrected visual acuity (DCVA) at 5 m, 1 m, 70 cm, 50 cm, 40 cm, and 30 cm, slit-lamp examination; defocus curve testing; contrast sensitivity (CS) was performed. The lens shape of the TFNT and the CNWT was examined under SEM. RESULTS: Mean spherical equivalent was 0.11 ± 0.41 D (CNWT group) and 0.12 ± 0.34 D (TFNT group) 1 month postoperation. DCVA and defocus curve showed no significant difference between the two groups. CS was significantly higher in CNWT group than TFNT group at spatial frequencies of 6 cycles per degree (cpd). Observation of the IOL with a scanning electron microscope (SEM) revealed that CNWT group had improved diffraction structure and edge processing accuracy compared to TFNT group. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference between the two groups in the defocus curve and visual acuity at all distances. CS was better in the CNWT group than in the TFNT group. IOL surface features may affect CS.

Visual performance and patient preference with bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus or combined implantation of an extended depth of focus/trifocal intraocular lens.

PURPOSE: Evaluate postoperative visual performance in patients with bilaterally implanted AT LARA or AT LARA/AT LISA tri (Carl Zeiss AG, Jena, Germany) intraocular lenses. METHODS: Multicentered, comparative, open-label, retrospective/prospective study. Post-IOL implantation, patients were prospectively enrolled into this study; preoperative patient data were collected retrospectively. Follow-up was at 2-4 and 5-8 months post-surgery. The primary endpoint was binocular best corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). The study was retrospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT05462067). RESULTS: Seventy-one patients (142 eyes) were enrolled; 67 patients (134 eyes) have 5-8 months data. The mean binocular CDVA at 2-4 months was -0.10 ± 0.06 logMAR in the bilateral AT LARA group ("bilateral") and -0.11 ± 0.09 logMAR in the combined implantation AT LARA/ AT LISA tri group ("combined implantation"); (P = 0.4856). At 5-8 months, mean binocular CDVA was -0.13 ± 0.06 logMAR in the bilateral group and -0.11 ± 0.09 in the combined implantation group (P = 0.4003). At 5-8 months, more eyes in the bilateral group attained 0.2 logMAR or better binocular uncorrected intermediate VA (UIVA; 67 cm) than those in the combined implantation group (100% vs. 94%, respectively). The bilateral group achieved a mean of 0.24 ± 0.11 logMAR in uncorrected near VA (UCNVA), compared to a mean of 0.16 ± 0.12 logMAR in the combined implantation group at 5-8 months (P = 0.0041). CONCLUSIONS: A combined implantation approach (AT LARA in the distance dominant eye/AT LISA tri in the non-dominant eye) produced similar CDVA outcomes but better UCNVA as bilateral implantation with the AT LARA. UIVA was comparable between groups. No new safety concerns were reported.