Posters

Prospective, randomised, comparative study of visual and optical outcomes after bilateral implantation of Tecnis Eyhance versus Rayner RayOne aspheric in patients undergoing routine cataract surgery

Poster Details

First Author: M.Nanavaty UK

Co Author(s):    Z. Ashena   S. Gallagher   S. Borkum   S. Betney   P. Frattaroli   E. Barbon     

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To compare uncorrected distance and intermediate vision uniocularly and binocularly at 1 and 3 months in a prospective, randomised comparative study where the patients were randomised to receive Tecnis Eyhance (Johnson & Johnson vision, USA) or RayOne (Rayner intraocular lenses ltd., UK) intraocular lenses.

Setting:

Sussex Eye Hospital, Brighton & Sussex University Hospitals NHS trust, Brighton, UK.

Methods:

In this study 50 patients (100 eyes) were recruited (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04175951). Patents were examined at 1- and 3-months post-surgery after bilateral sequential or surgeries on both eyes within 2 weeks. The primary outcomes were LogMAR unaided distance (UCDVA) and intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) at 60cm (uniocular and binocular). Secondary outcomes were: best corrected distance (CDVA) (uniocular and binocular) and distance correct intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA) at 60cm, manifest refraction, defocus focus curves, wavefront aberrometry using iTrace aberrometer, Catquest 9SF questionnaire, glare and halos questionnaire on 1-4 Likert scale (1= no glare and halos and 4 = continuous).

Results:

41 patients were recruited and 1-month data on 21 patients was available. Unilateral UCDVA(LogMAR 0.040.11 Vs. 0.140.17), UCIVA(LogMAR 0.290.17 Vs. 0.250.22), CDVA(LogMAR -0.030.08 Vs. 0.000.09), DCIVA(LogMAR 0.250.14 Vs. 0.270.17), total & internal spherical and vertical coma aberrations, Catquest 9SF questionnaire and glare and halos were not significantly different between Eyhance and RayOne groups. Defocus curve was significantly broader with Eyhance with -3D,-2.5D,-2D,-1.5D,-1.0D,-0.5D,0D,+0.5D,+1D&+1.5D(LogMAR 0.590.40 Vs. 0.640.23; 0.550.17 Vs. 0.550.21; 0.440.17 Vs. 0.500.20; 0.300.15 Vs. 0.360.15; 0.180.13 Vs. 0.200.11; 0.060.14 Vs. 0.070.11; -0.030.08 Vs. 0.000.09; 0.020.13 Vs. 0.070.12; 0.090.16 Vs. 0.220.11; 0.200.20 Vs. 0.360.14 respectively). This was similar for binocular assessments too.

Conclusions:

There is a significant difference in unilateral and bilateral defocus curves with Eyhance IOL giving a broader plateau. There was no significant difference in objective UCIVA and DCIVA and subjective questionnaire between the two groups at one month but there was a slight trend towards better DCIVA with Eyhance after 1 month. Full data on all 100 eyes at 1 and 3 months will be presented at the meeting. Eyhance IOL may be more forgiving than RayOne with mild postoperative refractive errors due to its broader defocus curve.

Financial Disclosure:

receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, research is funded, fully or partially, by a competing company, research is funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a competing company