Vision before and after scharioth macular lens implantation in patients with AMD: an electrophysiological study

• Published in: Documenta ophthalmologica 2021-08, Vol.143 (1), p.17-31
• Main Authors: Kremláček, Jan, Nekolová, Jana, Středová, Markéta, Langrová, Jana, Szanyi, Jana, Kuba, Miroslav, Kubová, Zuzana, Vít, František, Voda, Petr, Veselá, Martina, Jirásková, Naďa
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Acuity; Age; Cognitive ability; Electrophysiological recording; Electroretinography; Humans; Lens Implantation, Intraocular; Lenses, Intraocular; Macular Degeneration; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Ophthalmology; Original; Original Research Article; Psychophysics; Vision; Visual Acuity; Visual field
• ISSN: 0012-4486; 1573-2622
• DOI: 10.1007/s10633-020-09814-8

Background For patients with age-related macular degeneration (AMD), a special intraocular lens implantation partially compensates for the loss in the central part of the visual field. For six months, we evaluated changes in neurophysiological parameters in patients implanted with a “Scharioth macula lens” (SML; a center near high add + 10 D and peripheral plano carrier bifocal lens designed to be located between the iris and an artificial lens). Methods Fourteen patients (5 M, 9 F, 63–87 years) with dry AMD were examined prior to and at 3 days after, as well as 1, 2, and 6 months after, implantation using pattern-reversal, motion-onset, and cognitive evoked potentials, psychophysical tests evaluating distant and near visual acuity, and contrast sensitivity. Results Near visual acuity without an external aid was significantly better six months after implantation than before implantation (Jaeger table median (lower; upper quartile): 4 (1; 6) vs. 15 (13; 17)). Distant visual acuity was significantly altered between the pre- (0.7 (0.5; 0.8) logMAR) and last postimplantation visits (0.8 (0.7; 0.8) logMAR), which matched prolongation of the P100 peak time (147 (135; 151) ms vs. 161 (141; 166) ms) of 15 arc min pattern-reversal VEPs and N2 peak time (191.5 (186.5; 214.5) ms vs. 205 (187; 218) ms) of peripheral motion-onset VEPs. Conclusion SML implantation significantly improved near vision. We also observed a slight but significant decrease in distant and peripheral vision. The most efficient electrophysiological approach to test patients with SML was the peripheral motion-onset stimulation, which evoked repeatable and readable VEPs.