Posters

Visual outcomes of moderate monovision with monofocal IOLs vs a small-aperture IOL

Poster Details

First Author: B.Soares AUSTRALIA

Co Author(s):    J. Beltz                    

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To evaluate range of vision and patient satisfaction with modified monovision with bilateral aspheric monofocal IOLs versus contralateral implantation of a monofocal IOL and a small-aperture extended depth of focus IOL.

Setting:

Prospective, post-market, single site randomised controlled trial. Surgeries performed at the Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital in Melbourne, Australia.

Methods:

Forty subjects randomized into 2 groups. Group 1 implanted bilaterally with aspheric monofocal IOLs with refractive targets of emmetropia and -1.25 D in dominant and non-dominant eyes, respectively. Group 2 received an aspheric monofocal IOL in the dominant eye targeting emmetropia and an IC-8 IOL in the non-dominant eye targeting for -0.75 D. Nine subjects enrolled to date. One month monocular and binocular (OU) uncorrected near, intermediate and distance visual acuity (UCNVA, UCIVA, UCDVA) outcomes for 2 subjects per group are presented here. Results reported in decimal. Additional patients, follow-up visits and satisfaction results to be presented.

Results:

Mean monocular UCDVA was 0.6 + 0.28 for the IC-8 IOL eyes and 0.53 + 0.39 for the monofocal near eye. For UCIVA, IC-8 IOL eyes and near monofocal IOL eyes were 0.75 + 0.35 and 0.9 + 0.14, respectively. UCNVA for IC-8 IOL eyes was 0.82 + 0.26 and 0.52 + 0.16 in near monofocal IOL eyes. Binocularly, the monofocal subjects achieved 1.0 + 0.0, 0.9 + 0.14 and 0.52 + 0.16 for UCDVA, UCIVA and UCNVA. IC-8 IOL patients achieved 1.0 + 0.0 UCDVA OU, 0.75 + 0.35 UCIVA OU and 0.82 + 0.26 UCNVA OU.

Conclusions:

Interim results appear to be comparable between groups. Additional patients and follow-up is required.

Financial Disclosure:

None