Posters

RayOne trifocal vs Sulcoflex in terms of visual acuity and contrast sensitivity

Poster Details

First Author: F.Spedale ITALY

Co Author(s):    F. Blasetti   G. Di Girolamo   D. Rorro              

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To evaluate if there is a difference in terms of sensitivity to contrast or visual acuity in two trifocal lens; RayOne Trifocal and the new Sulcoflex lens a new trifocal lens for sulcus

Setting:

Chiari Hospital ASST Franciacorta Brescia, director Franco Spedale

Methods:

10 patients for a total of 20 eyes underwent bilateral cataract surgery by the same surgeon. Engraving 2.2 mm higher. In one eye a RayOne trifocal lens was implanted in the controlateral a RayOne hydrophobic lens and then a sulcoflex in the sulcus in duet system. Each patient was then evaluated individually for visual acuity and contrast sensitivity according to the Pelli Robson method at 3 meters and 1 meters without and with correction

Results:

The visual acuity at 3 months in the eyes with a RayOne Trifocal implant was found to be 0.888, while in the eyes with the Duet system (monofocal + Sulcoflex) the final result was 0.85. The sensitivity to contrast according to Pelli Robson at 3 meters was for the Trifocal RayOne of 12.02% UC and 10.58% BC, while it was found to be 12.26% UC and 10.47% BC in the duet system. At 1 meter RayOne Trifocal showed a contrast sensitivity of 6.64% UC and 6.10% BC and Sulcolfex 6.58% Uc and 6.04 BC. t student not statistically significant

Conclusions:

The Monofocal + Sulcoflex dual system offers a new possibility with the same characteristics of a classic trifocal lens for selected patients in which there is the uncertainty of the biometric calculation or the possibility of an incomplete compliance of the patient. The final visual acuity and contrast sensitivity are not lost, thus guaranteeing both a good quantity and a good quality of vision

Financial Disclosure:

... gains financially from competing product or procedure, ... 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 company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, ... receives non-monetary benefits from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, ... receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, ... is employed by a competing company, ... has significant investment interest in a company producing, developing or supplying product or procedure presented