Comparative analysis of visual performance after bilateral implantation of two novel diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses following lens removal

Session Details

Session Title: Refractive
Session Date/Time: Friday 09/02/2018 | 10:30-12:00
Paper Time: 10:42
Venue: Annex A

First Author: T.Kohnen GERMANY
Co Author(s): E. Hemkeppler  M. Herzog  S. Schoenbrunn  N. De Lorenzo  M. Boehm  K. Petermann  

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To compare visual outcomes, defocus curves and contrast sensitivity of two diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOL).

Setting:

Department of Ophthalmology, Goethe-University, Frankfurt, Germany

Methods:

In this prospective comparative case series, fourty eyes (20 patients) had bilateral implantation of either PanOptix (AcrySof® IQ PanoptixTM, Alcon Research, Fort Worth, TX, USA) or AT LISA MIOL (AT LISA® tri839MP, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany) pre-enrollment. Exclusion criteria were previous ocular surgeries, corneal astigmatism of >1.5 diopter (D), ocular pathologies or corneal abnormalities. Postoperative examination at 3 months included monocular and binocular uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) and distance-corrected visual acuity (DCVA) at 4 m, 60 cm versus 80 cm and 40 cm, monocular defocus testing, binocular contrast sensitivity (CS) under photopic and mesopic conditions, and a questionnaire on subjective quality of vision.

Results:

Both groups showed an excellent level of monocular UCVA and DCVA at 40 cm, 60 cm versus 80 cm, and 4 m with no significant difference (p > 0.05). The defocus curve of the PanOptix group (0.01 logMAR) showed a significantly better DCVA at 50 cm (defocus -2.0 D) compared to the AT LISA group (0.16 logMAR) (p < 0.001). The other distances of the defocus curve from 4 m to 40 cm (0 – (-2.5) D) showed no significant difference between both groups (p > 0.05). CS under photopic, mesopic and mesopic conditions with glare showed similar results between groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusions:

The PanOptix and AT LISA MIOL provide patients with excellent monocular and binocular distance, intermediate and near visual performance (> 0.1 logMAR). Both appear to be a good option for patients with intermediate vision needs, while PanOptix MIOL might be better for patients with closer vision requirements at 60 cm compared to AT LISA MIOL at 80 cm. This finding is inline with the intended focal point shift of the PanOptix MIOL from 80 cm to 60 cm. Both MIOLs showed comparable contrast sensitivity and high patient satisfaction, despite some optical phenomena and high spectacle independence.

Financial Disclosure:

gains financially from competing product or procedure, , travel has been funded, fully or partially, by a competing company, , travel has been funded, fully or partially, by 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, , receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, , gains financially from product or procedure presented