Cargando…

Comparison of Five Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: Optical-Bench Assessment with Visual-Quality Simulation

Presbyopia correction through implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) is a modality offered to both cataract and refractive-lens exchange patients. To maximize postoperative satisfaction, IOL selection needs to be made based on patients’ requirements aligned with the available technology....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Łabuz, Grzegorz, Yan, Weijia, Baur, Isabella D., Khoramnia, Ramin, Auffarth, Gerd U.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10095001/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37048607
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12072523
_version_ 1785023976150401024
author Łabuz, Grzegorz
Yan, Weijia
Baur, Isabella D.
Khoramnia, Ramin
Auffarth, Gerd U.
author_facet Łabuz, Grzegorz
Yan, Weijia
Baur, Isabella D.
Khoramnia, Ramin
Auffarth, Gerd U.
author_sort Łabuz, Grzegorz
collection PubMed
description Presbyopia correction through implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) is a modality offered to both cataract and refractive-lens exchange patients. To maximize postoperative satisfaction, IOL selection needs to be made based on patients’ requirements aligned with the available technology. Five Trifocal IOLs were assessed in this study, and their differentiating features were identified: Triumf POD L GF, AT Lisa Tri, Tecnis Synergy, AcrySof IQ PanOptix, and Acriva Trinova Pro C. The optical quality was assessed using the modulation-transfer-function principle. Simulated defocus curves were derived from a non-linear formula. Far-focus simulated visual acuity (simVA) was 0.03 logMAR or better for all the studied IOLs, showing minimal differences. However, each IOL’s intermediate focus position differed across a range from 61 cm to 80 cm; and for the near focus, it was 36 cm to 44 cm. Triumf demonstrated improved intermediate point at the expense of the near focus resulting in a lower predicted near VA. PanOptix exhibited the shortest range of vision without a clear distinction between intermediate and near-point. The remaining lenses presented three foci of comparable optical quality and, thus, simVA performance. Each model, however, revealed a different aperture-change response. Trinova function improved at intermediate but was worse at near for larger pupils. The opposite was observed for AT Lisa. Synergy’s optical quality change was predominantly associated with lower pupil diameter. In conclusion, the trifocal IOLs can be differentiated according to their secondary-foci position, light-energy distribution, and pupil-size-related behavior. The observed differences may translate directly into a clinical effect showing that the trifocal IOLs vary in their ability to deliver optimal vision at different distances, with some providing improved intermediate while others favor reading distance. The knowledge gained through this objective testing can support IOL selection, postoperative patient counselling and increase the chance of spectacle independence after surgery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10095001
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100950012023-04-13 Comparison of Five Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: Optical-Bench Assessment with Visual-Quality Simulation Łabuz, Grzegorz Yan, Weijia Baur, Isabella D. Khoramnia, Ramin Auffarth, Gerd U. J Clin Med Article Presbyopia correction through implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) is a modality offered to both cataract and refractive-lens exchange patients. To maximize postoperative satisfaction, IOL selection needs to be made based on patients’ requirements aligned with the available technology. Five Trifocal IOLs were assessed in this study, and their differentiating features were identified: Triumf POD L GF, AT Lisa Tri, Tecnis Synergy, AcrySof IQ PanOptix, and Acriva Trinova Pro C. The optical quality was assessed using the modulation-transfer-function principle. Simulated defocus curves were derived from a non-linear formula. Far-focus simulated visual acuity (simVA) was 0.03 logMAR or better for all the studied IOLs, showing minimal differences. However, each IOL’s intermediate focus position differed across a range from 61 cm to 80 cm; and for the near focus, it was 36 cm to 44 cm. Triumf demonstrated improved intermediate point at the expense of the near focus resulting in a lower predicted near VA. PanOptix exhibited the shortest range of vision without a clear distinction between intermediate and near-point. The remaining lenses presented three foci of comparable optical quality and, thus, simVA performance. Each model, however, revealed a different aperture-change response. Trinova function improved at intermediate but was worse at near for larger pupils. The opposite was observed for AT Lisa. Synergy’s optical quality change was predominantly associated with lower pupil diameter. In conclusion, the trifocal IOLs can be differentiated according to their secondary-foci position, light-energy distribution, and pupil-size-related behavior. The observed differences may translate directly into a clinical effect showing that the trifocal IOLs vary in their ability to deliver optimal vision at different distances, with some providing improved intermediate while others favor reading distance. The knowledge gained through this objective testing can support IOL selection, postoperative patient counselling and increase the chance of spectacle independence after surgery. MDPI 2023-03-27 /pmc/articles/PMC10095001/ /pubmed/37048607 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12072523 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Łabuz, Grzegorz
Yan, Weijia
Baur, Isabella D.
Khoramnia, Ramin
Auffarth, Gerd U.
Comparison of Five Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: Optical-Bench Assessment with Visual-Quality Simulation
title Comparison of Five Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: Optical-Bench Assessment with Visual-Quality Simulation
title_full Comparison of Five Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: Optical-Bench Assessment with Visual-Quality Simulation
title_fullStr Comparison of Five Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: Optical-Bench Assessment with Visual-Quality Simulation
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Five Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: Optical-Bench Assessment with Visual-Quality Simulation
title_short Comparison of Five Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses: Optical-Bench Assessment with Visual-Quality Simulation
title_sort comparison of five presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses: optical-bench assessment with visual-quality simulation
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10095001/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37048607
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12072523
work_keys_str_mv AT łabuzgrzegorz comparisonoffivepresbyopiacorrectingintraocularlensesopticalbenchassessmentwithvisualqualitysimulation
AT yanweijia comparisonoffivepresbyopiacorrectingintraocularlensesopticalbenchassessmentwithvisualqualitysimulation
AT baurisabellad comparisonoffivepresbyopiacorrectingintraocularlensesopticalbenchassessmentwithvisualqualitysimulation
AT khoramniaramin comparisonoffivepresbyopiacorrectingintraocularlensesopticalbenchassessmentwithvisualqualitysimulation
AT auffarthgerdu comparisonoffivepresbyopiacorrectingintraocularlensesopticalbenchassessmentwithvisualqualitysimulation