The PanOptix Trifocal IOL vs the ReSTOR 2.5 Active Focus and ReSTOR 3.0-Add Multifocal Lenses: A Study of Patient Satisfaction, Visual Disturbances, and Uncorrected Visual Performance

Hovanesian, John; Jones, Michael P.; Allen, Quentin B.

doi:10.2147/opth.s285628

Cited by 22 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Results from different studies are often based on different questionnaires, so direct comparisons are generally limited. However, it does appear that the reported spectacle independence rates in the current study are consistent with those reported for the same lens in prior studies, 2 , 19 , 21 and with the results reported in the pivotal US clinical trial submitted to the FDA to support approval of the lens. 20 One previously published study did use the same PRSIQ questionnaire when evaluating the same trifocal IOL.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Reported Patient Satisfaction and Spectacle Independence Following Bilateral Implantation of the PanOptix® Trifocal Intraocular Lens

Blehm¹,

Potvin²

2021

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To assess the spectacle independence and satisfaction of subjects after bilateral implantation of the PanOptix ® trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) at the time of cataract surgery. Design: Single site, prospective, single-arm study. Methods: Eligible subjects interested in a trifocal IOL to potentially reduce dependence on spectacles for near, intermediate and distance vision were enrolled and followed for 3 months after the second eye surgery. Visual acuity and refractive data were collected 1 month and 3 months postoperative, including the uncorrected and best distance-corrected binocular visual acuities at distance (4m), intermediate (60 cm) and near (40cm). A patient satisfaction and spectacle independence questionnaire were administered at the 3-month visit. Results: A total of 30 subjects successfully completed the study. Eighty-five percent of eyes (51/60) had a refraction within 0.50 D of plano with ≤ 0.50 D of refractive cylinder. One subject (3%) reported needing glasses for distance work, 3 (10%) for intermediate work and 4 (13%) for near work. Ninety percent or more of all subjects reported never wearing glasses or wearing them only a little at all working distances. Ninety percent or more were able to function without glasses at all 3 working distances all or most of the time. More than ninety percent of subjects reported being "com.pletely" or "mostly" satisfied with their vision without glasses or contact lenses at all three distances and overall. Conclusion:A high percentage of patients are likely to achieve spectacle independence for distance, intermediate and near vision with this trifocal IOL.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Reported Patient Satisfaction and Spectacle Independence Following Bilateral Implantation of the PanOptix® Trifocal Intraocular Lens

Blehm¹,

Potvin²

2021

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Specifically, we examined blended, bilateral, or mini-monovision approaches using the AcrySof IQ ReStor +2.5 D and ReStor +3.0 D. 10 These cohorts were compared with each other and with patients implanted with bilateral PanOptix. 11 We found that the mini-monovision cohort achieved better spectacle independence, particularly at intermediate distances, and lower rates of dysphotopsia than the blended or bilateral multifocal groups, although patient satisfaction was similar across all three cohorts. 10 Compared to these cohorts, bilateral PanOptix trifocal IOLs provided higher rates of patient satisfaction, much higher rates of complete spectacle independence, but also slightly higher rates of dysphotopsia.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 67%

The Vivity Extended Range of Vision IOL vs the PanOptix Trifocal, ReStor 2.5 Active Focus and ReStor 3.0 Multifocal Lenses: A Comparison of Patient Satisfaction, Visual Disturbances, and Spectacle Independence

Hovanesian¹,

Jones²,

Allen³

2022

OPTH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after intraocular lens (IOL) implantation with the AcrySof IQ Vivity IOL or Vivity Toric IOL to those achieved with other multifocal IOLs. Patients and Methods Prospective, open-label, multicenter analysis of PROs, including spectacle independence, dysphotopsia, and overall satisfaction among patients who underwent cataract surgery at least 1 month previously with bilateral Vivity or Vivity Toric lenses (n=60). Results were compared to outcomes from two similar prospective studies of bilateral AcrySof IQ PanOptix or PanOptix Toric trifocal IOLs (n = 59), blended AcrySof ReSTOR 2.5/3.0 IOLs (n=72) or bilateral ReSTOR ActiveFocus 2.5 D IOLs with a mini-monovision target [n = 95]). Results Patients in the Vivity cohort were significantly less likely to notice glare and halo in dim light (85% “none” or “just a little”) compared to PanOptix (69%, p<0.03), 2.5 mini-monovision (75%, p< 0.05) or 2.5/3.0 (71%, p< 0.05) patients. Complete spectacle independence for all visual activities combined (never need glasses) with Vivity was comparable to the mini-monovision and 2.5/3.0 groups (33%, 36%, and 31%, respectively) but significantly lower than in the PanOptix cohort (83%, p < 0.0001). Satisfaction was high across all groups. There were no statistically significant differences in best-corrected visual acuity, and no new safety concerns were reported. Conclusion The AcrySof IQ Vivity extended depth of focus IOL offers an expanded range of vision and better spectacle independence than has typically been achieved with traditional monofocal IOLs, with high rates of satisfaction and a favorable dysphotopsia profile compared to diffractive multifocal IOLs.

show abstract

“…1,2 The multifocal IOLs, particularly the trifocals, generally provide the highest likelihood of complete spectacle independence. [3][4][5] EDOF lenses are likely to provide good vision at distance and intermediate, with slightly worse near vision, but the expectation is that visual disturbances will be lower with an EDOF IOL because there are not two (or three) distinct foci. 5 This expectation may be in error.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Spectacle-Induced Low Myopia in the Non-Dominant Eye on the Binocular Defocus Curve with a Non-Diffractive Extended Vision Intraocular Lens

Gundersen¹,

Potvin²

2021

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To quantify the changes in the binocular defocus curve associated with the Vivity™ non-diffractive extended vision intraocular lens when the dominant eye was targeted for emmetropia and the non-dominant eye was artificially targeted for slight myopia using spectacles. Patients and Methods: This was a non-interventional research study of the corrected binocular defocus curve associated with binocular emmetropia (Setting A) and with emmetropia in the dominant eye and two different levels of myopia simulated in the non-dominant eye (−0.50 D, Setting B and −1.00 D, Setting C). Subjects were patients implanted with the AcrySof ® IQ Vivity ® intraocular lens in both eyes 3 to 12 months previously. Using the defocus data, the percentage of subjects with a continuous 2.5 D range of vision (distance to 40 cm) was calculated for various levels of minimum visual acuity (VA). Results: Forty subjects were enrolled. The mean spherical equivalent refraction was −0.06 D ± 0.36 D, with 0.37 D ± 0.29 D of refractive cylinder. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean VA at −0.25 D or at −0.50 D vergences between the test Settings, but there was a statistically significant difference at all other vergences. Differences were particularly noticeable at −2.00 D, −2.50 D and −3.00 D, where higher myopia in the nondominant eye yielded better binocular VA. A 2.5 D range of functional vision (20/25) was achieved by 38% of subjects at Setting A, 68% of subjects at Setting B and 85% of subjects at Setting C. At setting C, all but one subject (39/40, 97.5%) had a 2.5 D range of vision with a VA of 20/32 or better. Conclusion: Significant gains in binocular near vision, with only a nominal effect on distance vision, can be achieved with the Vivity IOL by leaving the non-dominant eye of patients with 0.50 D or 1.00 D of myopia.

show abstract

The PanOptix Trifocal IOL vs the ReSTOR 2.5 Active Focus and ReSTOR 3.0-Add Multifocal Lenses: A Study of Patient Satisfaction, Visual Disturbances, and Uncorrected Visual Performance

Cited by 22 publications

References 22 publications

Reported Patient Satisfaction and Spectacle Independence Following Bilateral Implantation of the PanOptix® Trifocal Intraocular Lens

Reported Patient Satisfaction and Spectacle Independence Following Bilateral Implantation of the PanOptix® Trifocal Intraocular Lens

The Vivity Extended Range of Vision IOL vs the PanOptix Trifocal, ReStor 2.5 Active Focus and ReStor 3.0 Multifocal Lenses: A Comparison of Patient Satisfaction, Visual Disturbances, and Spectacle Independence

The Effect of Spectacle-Induced Low Myopia in the Non-Dominant Eye on the Binocular Defocus Curve with a Non-Diffractive Extended Vision Intraocular Lens

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About