Barcelona 2015 Programme Registration Glaucoma Day 2015 Exhibition Virtual Exhibition Satellite Meetings Hotel Booking Star Alliance
ISTANBUL escrs









Take a look inside the London 2014 Congress

video-icon

Then register to join us
in Barcelona!





Comparison of through-focus and mesopic contrast with a small-aperture corneal inlay, accommodating or multifocal IOL

Search Abstracts by author or title
(results will display both Free Papers & Poster)

Session Details

Session Title: Moderated Poster Session: Refractive

Session Date/Time: Saturday 05/09/2015 | 14:00-15:00

Paper Time: 14:20

Venue: Poster Village: Pod 1

First Author: : G.Waring IV USA

Co Author(s): :                  

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To compare monocular and binocular mesopic contrast sensitivity and through focus following monocular implantation with KAMRA small aperture inlay versus binocular implantation with an accommodating or multifocal intraocular lens implant.

Setting:

Retrospective comparison of data from a prospective, non-randomized multi-center clinical trial on the KAMRA corneal inlay and a prospective, partially masked, randomized trial of 3 presbyopia-correcting IOLs.

Methods:

Study Population: Of 507 subjects with KAMRA inlays, predetermined subgroups included 327 subjects that underwent contrast sensitivity testing and another 114 subjects for defocus curve testing, along with 78 subjects randomized between bilateral Crystalens® Advanced Optics (AO) (Bausch + Lomb Surgical), AcrySof® IQ ReSTOR® +3.0 D (Alcon Laboratories) or Tecnis®+4D Multifocal (MF) (Abbott Medical Optics) IOLs.

Results:

KAMRA inlay subjects demonstrated improved intermediate and near vision with minimal to no change to distance vision, better contrast sensitivity in the inlay eye when compared to the multifocal IOLs, and better binocular contrast sensitivity when compared to subjects with all three premium IOLs. Crystalens AO was superior in uncorrected intermediate vision than the KAMRA inlay, but not distance-corrected intermediate and was worse in near vision. The multifocal IOLs were superior in near vision at their respective optimum near focus points, but worse in intermediate vision compared to both KAMRA inlay and Crystalens AO.

Conclusions:

The demonstrated performance of these devices should be considered, along with subjects' visual demands and expectations, degree of crystalline lens dysfunction and other ocular characteristics, in guiding the selection of small aperture corneal inlay or specific IOL in the correction of presbyopia.

Financial Interest:

One of the authors receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented

Back to previous