Defining the individual near and intermediate distances in different multifocal intraocular lens designs

Session Details

Session Title: Presented Poster Session: Pseudophakic IOLs

Session Date/Time: Tuesday 08/09/2015 | 09:30-11:00

Paper Time: 10:30

Venue: Poster Village: Pod 3

First Author: : F.Kretz GERMANY

Co Author(s): :    M. Attia   K. Linz   G. Auffarth        

Abstract Details

Purpose:

The aim of this study was to determine the best near and intermediate distance in patients that underwent implantation of different multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL) models.

Setting:

International Vision Correction Research Centre (IVCRC) & David J Apple International Laboratory for Ocular Pathology

Methods:

In a prospective study patients that underwent cataract and refractive lens exchange with implantation of different MIOLs (Tecnis: ZKB00, ZLB00, ZMB00; Alcon Restor SN6AD1; Oculentis: Comfort, MF30; AT LISA 839; PhysIOL Micro-F) were examined. Outcome parameters were UNVA, UIVA, DCNVA, DCIVA monocular and binocular as well as reading speed and reading distance (Salzburg reading desk).

Results:

Mean uncorrected binocular reading distances were: ZKB00 = 50.8cm, ZLB00 = 40.2cm, Restor = 41.3cm, Comfort = 47.4cm, MF30 = 39.30cm, AT LISA 839 = 38.9cm and Micro-F = 37.25cm. There was a statistical significant difference between the reading distances.

Conclusions:

Finding the right MIOL for each patient is a difficult task. Daily activities and especially work or hobbies under dim light conditions are one crucial influence factor. With the option to know the individual near and intermediate distances of or patients, we can additionally fulfil their needs performing their daily tasks and their favourite distance.

Financial Interest:

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