Copenhagen 2016 Registration Programme Exhibitor Information Virtual Exhibition Satellite Meetings Glaucoma Day 2016 Hotel Star Alliance
title

10 - 14 Sept. 2016, Bella Center, Copenhagen, Denmark

This Meeting has been awarded 27 CME credits

 

escrs app advert yo advert

Posters

Search Title by author or title

Comparative evaluation of three multifocal IOLs of new generation

Poster Details

First Author: B. Cochener FRANCE

Co Author(s):    C. Zagnoli                    

Abstract Details

Purpose:

Diffractive multifocal implantation takes nowadays the first place in the strategy of presbyopia management. The essential limit of the diffractive concept is the division and loss of light energy. Optimized designs have been proposed to improve visual performances with a correct preservation of vision quality. We propose to compare the outcome achieved with 3 IOls models of last generation.

Setting:

University Brest Hospital - France

Methods:

We conducted a prospective randomized study including 60 patients with a bilateral implantation distributed in 3 groups of 40 eyes according to the premium IOL concept that they received: Trifocal with combined optic MicroF® FineVision (Physiol), trifocal with 4 zones PanOptix® (Alcon) and extended depth of focus Symfony® (AMO-Abbott) (all calculated for emmetropia). Refraction and monocular and binocular visual acuity respectively at 4m, 60-70 cm and 40 cm evaluated. Quality of vision was approached by a questionnaire of life, registration of functional symptoms, contrast sensitivity in MTF and measure of ocular aberrations.

Results:

Mean age was 62. A true cataract was present in 30%. Emmetropia was achieved in 95% of the 2 trifocal groups and 88% in group 3 for far vision. Near glasses independency was obtained in 95% of eyes implanted with trifocal and 89% with extended depth of focus IOL. However this last concept provided a better quality of vision in terms of halos reported in 6% as mild and never severe compared to 10% in-group 1 and 12% in-group 2. But no patient in the 3 groups required an IOL exchange. A comfortable intermediate vision was noted in all cases with a preferential distance of 70 cm with Physiol IOL and 60 cm with the 2 others.

Conclusions:

This study demonstrates the visual benefit in terms of objective and qualitative vision brought by the refinements in optical designs. Deep and quantified evaluation of vision quality is required to emphasize the slight differences between the various models concerning comfort at different distances and induced functional impact. This will allow potentially to better adjust the IOL choice according to the patient needs. However, we can at that day assume that all new generation of diffractive premium IOLs offer a very high satisfaction rate in a carefully selected and well-informed patients population.

Financial Disclosure:

NONE

Back to Poster listing