ESCRS - FP66 - COMPARISON OF VISUAL OUTCOMES OF A MONOFOCAL, TWO ANDVANCED MONOFOCAL AND TWO EXTENDED DEPHT-OF-FOCUS INTRAOCULAR LENSES

COMPARISON OF VISUAL OUTCOMES OF A MONOFOCAL, TWO ANDVANCED MONOFOCAL AND TWO EXTENDED DEPHT-OF-FOCUS INTRAOCULAR LENSES

Published 2022 - 26th ESCRS Winter Meeting

Reference: FP66 | Type: Abstracts | DOI: 10.82333/8hgj-z632

Authors: Tiago Bravo Ferreira* 1 , Filomena Ribeiro 2 , Diana Silva 1 , Ana Cláudia Matos 1 , Sylvia Gaspar 1 , Soraia Almeida 1

1Ophthalmology,Hospital da Luz Lisboa,Lisboa,Portugal, 2Ophthalmology,Hospital da Luz Lisboa, Lisbon University and Visual Sciences Research Centre,Lisboa,Portugal

Purpose

To compare the clinical outcomes after cataract surgery with the implantation of five different types of intraocular lenses (IOLs): a monofocal IOL (Tecnis 1, J&J Vision), two advanced monofocal IOLs (Tecnis Eyhance, J&J Vision and RayOne EMV, Rayner), and two extended-depth-of-focus (EDOF) IOLs (Tecnis Symfony, J&J Vision and AcrySof IQ Vivity, Alcon).

Setting

Hospital da Luz Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

Methods

In a prospective comparative case series, 258 eyes of 129 patients undergoing cataract surgery were enrolled in 5 groups: Tecnis 1 group (30 patients), Eyhance group (30 patients), RayOne EMV group (15 patients), Symfony group (30 patients), and Vivity group (24 patients). The outcomes in terms of distance, intermediate and near visual acuity (VA), refraction, defocus curve, photic phenomena and spectacle independence were evaluated at 3-months follow-up.

Results

No significant differences between groups were found in monocular uncorrected distance VA (Tecnis 1 0.01±0.08; Eyhance 0.02±0.07; RayOne EMV 0.02±0.09; Symfony 0.03±0.09; Vivity 0.03±0.10; p=0.341). In contrast, significant differences among groups were found in monocular distance-corrected intermediate (Tecnis 1 0.26±0.08; Eyhance 0.16±0.09; RayOne EMV 0.08±0.13; Symfony 0.07±0.11; Vivity 0.06±0.08; p<0.001) and near VA (Tecnis 1 0.48±0.12, Eyhance 0.31±0.09, RayOne EMV 0.26±0.14; Symfony 0.24±0.11; Vivity 0.22±0.13; p=0.003). Significant differences between groups were found in the visual acuity for vergence demands of -0.50, to -3.00 D (p<0.001). Significant differences between the Symfony and the other groups were found in the frequency, severity and bothersomeness of different visual symptoms, including glare and haloes (p=0.044). After surgery, 3.3%, 26.7%, 66.7%, 63.3% and 70.8% of patients did not require the use of spectacles for any distance in the Tecnis 1, Eyhance, RayOne EMV, Symfony and Vivity groups, respectively.

Conclusion

The two advanced monofocal and two EDOF IOLs studied provide an effective visual rehabilitation, resulting in an improved intermediate and near VA, minimal increased incidence of photic phenomena and higher spectacle independence when compared with a standard monofocal IOL.