Optical bench analysis of opacified and clear Oculentis Lentis-LS-502-1 single piece hydrophilic acrylic blue light filtering IOL

Session Details

Session Title: Presented Poster Session 24: IOL Technology 2

Session Date/Time: Tuesday 16/09/2014 | 15:00-17:00

Paper Time: 16:45

Venue: Pod 3 (Poster Village)

First Author: : T.Tandogan GERMANY

Co Author(s): :    G. Auffarth   J. Weindler   F. Kretz        

Abstract Details

Purpose:

Optical bench analysis and comparison of opacified and explanted versus new and clear Oculentis Lentis-LS-502-1 single piece hydrophilic acrylic blue light filtering intraocular lens (IOL).

Setting:

International Vision Correction Research Centre (IVCRC) & David J Apple International Laboratory of Ophthalmic Pathology ,Dept. of Ophthalmology, Univ. of Heidelberg, Germany

Methods:

In a laboratory study we compared the measurements of modulation transfer function (MTF) in sagittal (MTFsag) and tangential (MTFtan) planes, at 50 lp/mm and 100 lp/mm of an opacified and that’s why explanted Oculentis Lentis-LS-502-1 single piece hydrophilic acrylic blue light filtering IOL (+19,5 diopters) versus a new and clear one (+14,0 diopters). Also MTF area (MTFA) values are calculated for sagital (MTFA_∫s) tangential (MTFA_∫t) and mean values (MTFA_∫st_mean). Through focus scan (TFS) and line spread function (LSF) curves are also documented. For each lens the measurements were repeated 5 times each. Using USAF (United States Air Force) target analysis, the quality of images produced by these IOLs is also documented and compared visually. Optical bench analyses were performed with the OptiSpheric IOL (Trioptics, Germany) optical bench.

Results:

The clear IOL showed at 50 lp/mm MTFsag values of mean: 0,7728 min.: 0,769 max.: 0,779 (std. dev.: 0,0036) and MTFtan values of mean: 0,7733 min.: 0,769 max.: 0,776 (std. dev.: 0,0030), at 100 lp/mm MTFsag mean: 0,5787 min.: 0,576 max.: 0,586 (std. dev.: 0,0041) and MTFtan mean: 0,5747 min.: 0,570 max.: 0,577 (std. dev.: 0,0031). MTFA_∫s was mean: 93,2360% min: 92,916% max: 93,930% (std. dev.: 0,3984%) MTFA_∫t mean: 92,2923% min.: 91,659% max.: 92,744% (std. dev.: 0,4185%). MTFA_∫st_mean values were mean: 92,7642% min.: 92,442% max.: 93,337% (std. dev.: 0,3509). The opacified, explanted IOL showed at 50 lp/mm MTFsag values of mean: 0,7461 min.: 0,742 max.: 0,749 (std. dev.: 0,0027) and MTFtan values of mean: 0,7494 min.: 0,745 max.: 0,755 (std. dev.: 0,0039), at 100 lp/mm MTFsag mean: 0,5496 min.: 0,546 max.: 0,554 (std. dev.: 0,0035) and MTFtan mean: 0,5397 min.: 0,525 max.: 0,554 (std. dev.: 0,0124). MTFA_∫s was mean: 84,8422% min: 84,346% max: 85,223% (std. dev.: 0,3345%) MTFA_∫t mean: 78,4801% min.: 74,905% max.: 82,077% (std. dev.: 3,0268%) MTFA_∫st_mean values were mean: 81,6612% min.: 79,814% max.: 83,211% (std. dev.: 0,3509%). The image quality of the USAF target was only slightly better with the clear IOL than with the opacified, explanted one.

Conclusions:

MTF and MTFA values were overall better with the clear IOL and the difference between MTFsag and MTFtan is statistically significant smaller than the opacified and explanted IOL. Lower MTF values correlate with the reduced visual acuity of the patient after the opacification of the IOL. The higher difference between sagital and tangential MTF values of the opacified IOL show an overall deterioration of the optical quality which may be caused as a result of the structural changes in the optic due to manipulations during the explantation or the opacifications in the optic. The image quality was only slightly better with the clear IOL comparing USAF target analyses subjectively.

Financial Interest:

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