Clinical experiences with a new diffractive extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens: comparison with a former generation

Session Details

Session Title: Cataract
Session Date/Time: Saturday 10/02/2018 | 08:30-11:00
Paper Time: 10:30
Venue: Blue Hall

First Author: P.Hagen GERMANY
Co Author(s): D. Breyer  H. Kaymak  K. Klabe  T. Ax  F. Kretz  G. Auffarth  

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To evaluate the visual outcomes and quality of vision after implantation of a new diffractive extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOL. We compare the results with those of a former diffractive EDOF IOL.

Setting:

All implantations and follow-ups were performed at the Breyer-Kaymak-Klabe Eyesurgery in Duesseldorf, Germany, which is part of the International Vision Correcton Research Center (IVCRC.net).

Methods:

This retrospective quality management investigation comprises results after bilateral implantation of the new diffractive EDOF IOL AT LARA (Carl Zeiss Meditec) in 15 patients and of the (toric) diffractive TECNIS Symfony (Abbott Medical Optics) in 26 patients. Follow up exams have been performed at 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery. Manifest refraction, visual acuity, defocus curves, contrast sensitivity, halo & glare assessment and a patient questionnaire were documented.

Results:

The mean monocular postoperative UDVA at 1 months was (0.10+-0.15)logMAR and (0.09+-0.18)logMAR in the LARA and Symfony group, respectively. A deviation from target SE of at most +/-0.5D was achieved in 88% and 91% of eyes and 95% and 97% of eyes were within +/-1.0D. The defocus curves showed improved intermediate visual acuities for both EDOF IOLs with overall MIOL capacities of 74% and 75%. Halo & Glare were slightly higher than in phakic eyes but predominantly described as undisturbing.

Conclusions:

Considering life style aspects of most of our patients in case of a computer-based daily routine, as well as menage, handcraft or night driving, the new diffractive extended range of vision lens accomplishes patients’ needs.

Financial Disclosure:

receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, , 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, , receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a competing company