Comparison of Visual Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction After Bilateral Implantation of an EDOF IOL and a Mix-and-Match Approach

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate visual outcomes at different distances (near, intermediate, and far), depth of focus, optical quality, quantitative dysphotopsia, and patient satisfaction in two groups. METHODS: The extended depth of focus (EDOF) only group (n = 40 eyes) was implanted bilaterally with an EDOF intraocular lens (IOL) and the mixed group (n = 40 eyes) was implanted with the same EDOF IOL in the dominant eye and a trifocal IOL in the fellow eye. At the 3-month postoperative visit, refractive outcomes and monocular and binocular uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuities for far UDVA, CDVA, distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA) at 80 cm, uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) at 40 cm, and binocular defocus curve were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean spherical equivalent (SE) 3 months postoperatively was −0.16 ± 0.41 diopters (D) in the EDOF only group and −0.39 ± 0.63 D in the mixed group. In the EDOF only group, binocular visual acuities were: UDVA = −0.04 ± 0.07 logMAR (20/18); CDVA = −0.04 ± 0.06 logMAR (20/18); DCIVA (80 cm) = 0.07 ± 0.19 logMAR (20/23); DCNVA (40 cm) = 0.32 ± 0.15 logMAR (20/42); and UNVA (40 cm) = 0.24 ± 0.17 logMAR (20/35). In the mixed group, binocular visual acuities were: UDVA = 0.03 ± 0.09 logMAR (20/21) ( P = .08); CDVA = −0.01 ± 0.07 logMAR (20/20) ( P = .25); DCIVA (80 cm) = 0.24 ± 0.23 logMAR (20/35) ( P = .08); DCNVA (40 cm) = 0.19 ± 0.07 logMAR (20/31) ( P = .03); and UNVA (40 cm) = 0.18 ± 0.10 logMAR (20/30) ( P = .37). CONCLUSIONS: Effective restoration of visual acuity was demonstrated in both groups, with high levels of visual quality and patient satisfaction. Better results in near visual acuity were demonstrated in the mixed group. [ J Refract Surg. 2019;35(7):408–416.]

<p>Visual Outcomes, Visual Quality and Patient Satisfaction: Comparing a Blended Bifocal Approach to Bilateral Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens Implantation</p>

“…In another published study where the target was emmetropia in both eyes, 94% reported minimal or no photic phenomena at 4–6 months postop with a median satisfaction score of 9/10 for distance vision and near and 10/10 for intermediate vision 10. A study of the same lens by Tarib et al noted that halos and glare were observed by 70% and 30% of the patients, respectively 11. Mean VA has also been reported in the literature.…”

“…Mean VA has also been reported in the literature. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) ranged from −0.0411 to 0.08 logMAR12 with a target of emmetropia. Distance-corrected intermediate VA (DCIVA) was 0.19 logMAR12 and the best distance-corrected near VA (DCNVA) ranged from 0.3211 to 0.33 logMAR 12…”

<p>Evaluation of Visual and Subjective Outcomes with Mix-and-Match of Three One-Piece Tecnis Multifocal IOLs of Varying Add Powers</p>

“…[7][8][9][10] Mix-and-match of IOLs with different add powers is an approach that has been used to individualize visual correction. [11][12][13] Combinations of near add MIOLs and low add MIOLs, such as +4.0 D add and +2.75 D IOLs have shown good visual acuities for near and distance performance, however less has been reported about the combination of +2.75 D with a +3.25 D IOL. 14,15 Patients with unique lifestyle needs can now choose to combine IOL options to best suit their visual needs.…”

Aktuelle Übersicht: multifokale Linsen und Extended-Depth-of-Focus-Intraokularlinsen

“…Auch hier werden, wenn auch optikbedingt in deutlich geringerem Ausmaß als bei refraktiven Optiken, die Vorteile der MIOL mit geringeren Halo-und Glare-Phänomenen bei diesmal geringerem Nahzusatz kombiniert. Wir verwenden diese Technik durch die Kombination der EDOF-Linse LARA 829MP im fernkorrigierten Auge und der trifokalen LISA 839MP im nahkorrigierten Auge [53] (vgl. ▶ Abb.…”