Visual outcomes and patient satisfaction following implantation of two trifocal intraocular lenses with different intermediate focal distances
Session Details
Session Title: Presented Poster Session: Multifocal IOLs
Venue: Poster Village: Pod 1
First Author: : M.Holzer GERMANY
Co Author(s): : T. Rabsilber G. Auffarth B. Thomas
Abstract Details
Purpose:
To evaluate functional outcomes of two trifocal intraocular lenses (IOL) with different intermediate focal distances: the AcrySof IQ PanOptix (Alcon Inc.) and AT Lisa tri 839 MP (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG).
Setting:
Prospective, single-center study. University of Heidelberg, Department of Ophthalmology, Heidelberg, Germany.
Methods:
Cataract and refractive lens exchange patients with implantation of PanOptix
or AT Lisa tri & tri toric were examined 3 months postoperatively. Refraction,
uncorrected/corrected distance (UDVA/CDVA), uncorrected/distance-corrected
intermediate (60 or 80 cm, UIVA/DCIVA), uncorrected/distance corrected/corrected
near visual acuities (40 cm, UNVA, DCNVA, CNVA), defocus curves and subjective
questionnaire were performed.
Results:
26 eyes of 13 patients (PanOptix) and 27 eyes of 14 patients (AT Lisa tri/AT
Lisa tri toric) were examined. Median monocular visual acuities (PanOptix/AT Lisa tri &
tri toric) were: UDVA 0.02/0.02 logMAR, CDVA -0.04/-0.04 logMAR, UIVA (60/80 cm)
0.04/0.06 logMAR, DCIVA (60/80 cm) 0.04/0.02 logMAR, UNVA 0.04/0.10 logMAR and
DCNVA 0.02/0.08 logMAR. The PanOptix had a median deviation from target
refraction of 0.02 D (range -0.59 to 0.53 D) and the AT Lisa tri & tri toric of 0.35 D
(range -0.48 to 1.22 D) (p=0.0007). Patient satisfaction was comparable.
Conclusions:
Both trifocal IOLs revealed good results for distance, intermediate and
near visual acuity with differences in the defocus curves. The PanOptix had a slightly
better outcome regarding achievement of target refraction.
Financial Disclosure:
research is funded, fully or partially, by 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, research is funded, fully or partially, by a competing company
