Loading…

Visual performance and impact of residual refractive errors with trifocal intraocular lenses of different aspheric design

Background To assess the visual quality and the tolerance to low refractive errors of two trifocal intraocular lenses (IOL) with different amounts of spherical aberration (SA). Methods The study included patients having bilateral implantation of the AcrySof® IQ PanOptixTM (aberration-correcting) or...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European journal of ophthalmology 2023-03, Vol.33 (2), p.949-956
Main Authors: Rementería-Capelo, Laureano A, Contreras, Inés, García-Pérez, Jorge L, Blázquez, Vanesa, Ruiz-Alcocer, Javier
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background To assess the visual quality and the tolerance to low refractive errors of two trifocal intraocular lenses (IOL) with different amounts of spherical aberration (SA). Methods The study included patients having bilateral implantation of the AcrySof® IQ PanOptixTM (aberration-correcting) or the RayOneTM (aberration-free) Trifocal IOL. Three months after the surgery patients underwent: monocular/binocular and uncorrected/corrected distance visual acuity (VA) and binocular defocus curves. Binocular contrast sensitivity (CSF) and subjective halo perception were assessed with the best distance correction (CDVA), with a positive defocus of + 0.50D and with a negative defocus of −0.50D. Patient's satisfaction was evaluated with the Catquest9-SF questionnaire. Results This study included 54 eyes (28 with PanOptix and 26 with RayOne) of 27 patients. Both groups achieved corrected/uncorrected and monocular/binocular distance VA values better than 0.0 logMAR (1.0 decimal) with no statistically significant differences between them (p > 0.05 for all cases). Defocus curves showed a VA of 0.1 logMAR or better between −2.5 and + 1.0D with no differences between groups (p > 0.05 at all distances). Overall CSF values remained stable under the induced residual refractions for both groups. The halo effect remained stable for the PanOptix group but increased with myopization in the RayOne group (p = 0.02). The questionnaire showed high rates of patient's satisfaction with no differences between groups. Conclusion Both lenses showed overall good visual outcomes and offered high rates of patient's satisfaction. Moreover, in normal patients with trifocal IOLs, the combination of residual refractive errors and certain amounts of SA may increase some visual disturbances.
ISSN:1120-6721
1724-6016
DOI:10.1177/11206721221144928