Posters

Evaluation of a trifocal multifocal intraocular lens in a bi-Toric and a non-Toric version over a 36 month follow up period

Poster Details

First Author: R.Gerl GERMANY

Co Author(s):    M. Müller   D. Breyer   H. Kaymak   M. Gerl   G. Auffarth   F. Kretz

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To evaluate the functional outcome after implantation of a trifocal MIOL in a bi-toric (AT LISA 939MP, Carl Zeiss Meditech, Germany) and a non-toric (AT LISA 839MP, Carl Zeiss Meditech, Germany) version over 36month follow up period.

Setting:

International Vision Correction Research Centre Network (IVCRC.net), Germany

Methods:

Examinations included UDVA, UIVA, UNVA, CDVA, DCIVA and DCNVA [logMAR]. Additionally a Salzburg Reading Desk (SRD) evaluation (uncorrected and distance corrected) was performed.

Results:

In the toric group the median postoperative binocular UDVA, UIVA and UNVA were 0.02, 0.04 and 0.10 compared to a CDVA, DCIVA and DCNVA of 0.04, -0.10 and -0.10 [logMAR]. The non-toric group showed a UDVA, UIVA and UNVA of 0.06, 0.09 and 0.06 compared to a CDVA, DCIVA and DCNVA of 0.04, 0.00 and 0.06 [logMAR], respectively.

Conclusions:

Both MIOLs offer a restoration of the visual function in multiple distances. The bitoricity of the toric version additionally offers a good compensation for corneal astigmatism. FINANCIAL DISCLOUSRE: One or more of the authors receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, One or more of the authors travel has been funded, fully or partially, by a competing company, One or more of the authors travel has been funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, One or more of the authors research is funded, fully or partially, by a competing company, One or more of the authors research is funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, One or more of the authors receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a competing company