COMPARISON OF THE VISUAL PERFORMANCE OF PATIENTS IMPLANTED WITH THREE DIFFERENT INTRAOCULAR LENSES IN A LIGHTING FACILITY OF DIFFERENT LIGHTING COMBINATIONS FOR A SERIES OF ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING

Published 2023 - 27th ESCRS Winter Meeting

Reference: P061 | Type: Free Paper Submission | DOI: 10.82333/tej0-rs50

Authors: Eirini-Kanella Panagiotopoulou* ¹ , Minas Bakirtzis ¹ , Eirini Vavanou ¹ , Christos Panagis ¹ , Panagiota Ntonti ¹ , Doukas Dardabounis ¹ , Georgios Labiris ¹

¹Department of Ophthalmology,University Hospital of Alexandroupolis,Alexandroupolis,Greece

Purpose

The primary objective of this study is to compare the visual performance of patients implanted binocularly with trifocal diffractive, bifocal hybrid or monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) in an experimental lighting facility in different user-defined combinations of light intensity and light temperature for a series of activities of daily living that require near and intermediate vision

Setting

Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital of Alexandroupolis, Alexandroupolis, Greece

Methods

This is a prospective, comparison study. Pseudophakic patients populated three study groups (SGs) according to the type of the implanted IOL: a) SG1: trifocal diffractive (Panoptix), b) SG2: bifocal hybrid refractive-diffractive (Restor), and, c) SG3: monofocal aspherical (SN60WF). All participants addressed 10 near and intermediate activities of daily life (ADLs) in nine combinations of light intensity (25fc, 50fc, 75fc) and light temperature (color) (3000K, 4000K, 6000K).

Results

All patients of the three groups performed all ADLs in the nine lighting settings. SG1 demonstrated the best scores in the majority of ADLs and lighting settings, followed by the SG2. SG3 presented the worst scores. ADLs using printed material that require good near vision (eg. phone book search, drops bottle reading) showed significant differences among the three study groups in all lighting combinations, while ADLs needing manual dexterity (eg. open door test, screwdriver test) demonstrated no significant differences among the three study groups in all lighting combinations.

Conclusion

This is the first study that compares visual performance of patients following lens extraction surgery implanted with different IOLs performing a series of ADLs that require near and intermediate vision. Patients implanted binocularly with diffractive trifocal IOLs had the best visual performance in all lighting combinations, while no difference was observed among the IOL groups in all lighting combinations for ADLs needing manual dexterity.