Comparison of a hydrophilic and a hydrophobic apodized diffractive multifocal intraocular lens

Abstract

To compare outcomes between a new design apodized diffractive hydrophilic multifocal intraocular lens (IOL) (Seelens MF; study group), and a well-known apodized diffractive hydrophobic multifocal IOL (SN6AD1; control group). A comparative case series comparing refractive and visual outcomes at distance and near. Patient satisfaction with a validated questionnaire, dysphotopsia and straylight measurement scores were recorded at 3 months post-operatively. The study group comprised 48 eyes and the control group 37 eyes. At 3 months post-operatively the mean uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was not statistically significant different between the study group and the control group (0.02 ± 0.07 logMAR [SD] vs 0.04 ± 0.09 logMAR). Corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was statistically significantly better with the study lens (−0.04 ± 0.05 logMAR vs −0.01 ± 0.04 logMAR (p < 0.019). There was no clinical or statistical significant difference at the 40 cm distance (0.09 ± 0.12 logMAR vs 0.08 ± 0.09 logMAR). The study group had statistically significant better uncorrected near acuity at 50 and 60 cm distances (p < 0.03 and p < 0.007, respectively). In terms of satisfaction the lenses performed equally. Halos were seen less often with the study lens. Straylight, as a parameter for visual quality, was significantly less with the study lens. Conclusion: The Seelens MF performs equally as well as the well-known SN6AD1 for UCDA and CDVA. The Seelens MF performs better at intermediate distance, and seems to allow for better depth of focus, and increased visual quality. More study is needed to corroborate the last finding.

Surgical compensation of presbyopia with corneal inlays

“…The main disadvantage of multifocal contact lenses is poor image quality of the focused image and simultaneous perception of a defocused ghost image that may be exacerbated by decentration of the contact lens or movement with blinking [6]. Multifocal intraocular lenses may also have similar dysphotopsia symptoms, including night glare and haloes, and reduced contrast sensitivity [7][8][9]. Conductive keratoplasty tends to regress postoperatively and can limit the quality of vision with induction of astigmatism and high-order aberrations [10,11].…”

Research Article. The Prevalence of Dysphotopsia in Patients with Recent Cataract Surgery

“…[5] The lens visual side effects are reported in the current literature as being between 2 and 18%, with a slight increase for multifocal lenses, were as known, the patients have higher demand. [8,11,13,14,22] The incidence of dysphotopsias in our study is 24.03%, we think that this may be due to our sample size and the phrasing of our question; some questing may have implied an certain answer.…”

“…High demand in term of visual outcome, and postoperative satisfaction, make the need of additional chair time. [8,18,22] Thus the postoperative visual acuity is not enough for evaluating the visual function. [5] Finding these complaints is quite surprising, given that often during the postoperative ocular exam the surgeon finds a good visual acuity.…”

“…These lenses generate a degree of negative spherical aberration thus compensating the positive spherical aberration induced by the cornea. [6,[19][20][21][22] Studies show that the blue light-filtering yellow chromophore in some hydrophilic lenses can reduce the effect of positive dysphotopsia, without affecting color vision. [16][17][18][19] The blue light filtering lenses can improve vision by enhancing contrast, where initially designed to protect the retina form phototoxicity.…”

Straylight Measurements in Two Different Apodized Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

“…By adjusting the pupil dependency of the diffractive rings, even an IOL with an optic of 11 rings such as the SeeLens MF shows less straylight than an apodized diffractive IOL with 9 rings (SN6AD1). Improved apodization patterns may have a good effect on side effects such as halos and glare (disability glare), 31 but more study is necessary to elucidate the exact contribution of the IOL material.…”