Comparison Of Clinical Outcomes In Patients Bilaterally Implanted With The Rayone Emv Using A Binocular Emmetropic Target In One Group And A Monovision Target In Another Group
Published 2023 - 41st Congress of the ESCRS
Reference: PO0268 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/kvxd-vh35
Authors: Bartłomiej Markuszewski* 1 , Adam Wylęgała 2 , Anna Markuszewska 3 , Ewa Wróblewska-Czajka 4 , Magdalena Nandzik 4 , Klaudyna Szydełko 3 , Edward Wylęgała 4
1Wroclaw Eye Center,Wroclaw,Poland; Chair and Clinical Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medical Sciences,Medical University of Silesia,Katowice,Poland, 2Department of Ophthalmology,District Railway Hospital in Katowice,Katowice,Poland;Department of Pathophysiology,Medical University of Silesia,Katowice,Poland, 3Wroclaw Eye Center,Wroclaw,Poland, 4Chair and Clinical Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medical Sciences,Medical University of Silesia,Katowice,Poland
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to present the clinical results of patients bilaterally implanted with Rayner RayOne EMV RAO200E intraocular lenses (IOLs) in a private hospital setting. An additional purpose is to find out about differences in the clinical outcomes between patients targeted for emmetropia and patients implanted following a monovision approach with a 1D refractive difference between the dominant and non-dominant eye.
Setting
Private hospital setting - Wroclaw Eye Center, Wroclaw, Poland
Methods
The cohort consisted of 30 patients bilaterally implanted with RayOne EMV IOL. Patients were randomized into 2 groups; 50% targeted for emmetropia in both eyes and 50% targeted for monovision with a target refraction of -1.0 D in the non-dominant eye. The exclusion criteria were: corneal astigmatism >1.0 D; corneal, retinal or optic nerve pathologies; previous eye surgery. Follow-up exams were performed at 1 day - 2 weeks and 1 month. We assessed: Binocular UDVA, UIVA (66cm), UNVA (40cm), VF-14 questionnaire, contrast sensitivity (photopic and mesopic), photic side effects, and postoperative complications. Wilcoxon and Mann Whitney test were used to analyse the data on achieved results and differences between the 2 groups, respectively.
Results
Best distance and near-corrected and near-uncorrected binocular vision significantly increased preoperative to postoperative (p<0.001 for all parameters). Postoperative binocular UNVA of J2 was achieved in 5 patients in the emmetropic group and 7 patients in the monovision group, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found between the 2 groups on binocular UDVA (p=0.654), UIVA (p=0.153) and UNVA (p=0.316). Mean refractive error improved from -1.75±2.45 D preop to -0.35±0.23 D postop (p<0.001). No IOL dislocation or tilt was observed. No adverse effects were noticed. VF-14 questionnaire results improved from preop 59.7±7.7 to 86.8±5.7 points postop (p<0.001) with no significant difference between two groups (p=0.249).
Conclusions
In our cohort of patients bilaterally implanted with Rayner RayOne EMV IOLs we observed a significant improvement of visual acuities for all distances, but no statistically significant differences in binocular visual acuities between patients targeted for emmetropia and patients following a monovision approach were identified. Independent of the targeted refraction, no photic side effects were reported or postoperative complications occurred.
In our opinion, the bilateral implantation of RayOne EMV IOLs seems to be a good option for cataract patients that expect a good distance and intermediate and useful near visual acuity as well as a high quality of vision.