ESCRS - PP01.09 - Spectacle Independence And Patient Preferences After Bilateral Edof Implantation Or Combined Implantation With An Edof And Trifocal Iol

Spectacle Independence And Patient Preferences After Bilateral Edof Implantation Or Combined Implantation With An Edof And Trifocal Iol

Published 2023 - 41st Congress of the ESCRS

Reference: PP01.09 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/43qz-4754

Authors: Florian Kretz* 1 , Thomas Kohnen 2 , Jonathan Moore 3 , Jens Ostergaard 4

1Ophthalmologie,Precise Vision Augenärzte,Rheine,Germany;Ophthalmology,Dr. Florian Kretz Consulting e.K.,Rheine,Germany, 2Ophthalmology,University Hospital,Frankfurt,Germany, 3Ophthalmology,Cathedral Eye Hospital,Belfast,United Kingdom, 4Ophthalmologie,Copenhagen University,Copenhagen,Denmark

Purpose

To determine spectacle independence and patient preference for either bilateral implantation with AT LARA (Carl Zeiss AG) or combined implantation with the AT LARA/AT LISA tri (Carl Zeiss AG) IOLs after uneventful cataract surgery or refractive lens exchange (RLE).  

Setting

Multicentered, prospective open-label study.

Methods

Subjects were enrolled only if they had undergone uncomplicated cataract surgery or RLE. Preoperative patient demographics and characteristics were assessed retrospectively. Enrolled subjects were followed up was at 2-4 months post-surgery and at 5-8 months post-surgery. The primary endpoint was the comparison of binocular best corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). Secondary outcomes included patient-reported parameters determined via the McAlinden questionnaire to ascertain spectacle use postoperatively and overall patient satisfaction.

Results

Of the 71 patients enrolled; 67 had data at last follow-up. The mean age of those undergoing cataract surgery (63.4±9.3 years) and those undergoing RLE (57.3±7.2 years) was statistically significant (P=0.003). 94.4% of the patients in the bilateral group and 91.3% in the combined implantation group did not need spectacles for distance at the 5-8 month follow-up. There were no statistically significant differences in spectacle use between the cataract and RLE groups at any distance or lens implantation group. By the 5-8 month follow-up, all patients in the bilateral group and 44 patients in the combined implantation group (91.7%) would recommend the same lens to relatives and family.

Conclusions

The combined implantation approach produced similar patient satisfaction rates and spectacle use as AT LARA bilateral implantation. At the last follow-up, 5.6% of patients in the bilateral group and 8.7% of patients in the combined implantation group reported needing spectacles at least some of the time. A combined implantation approach produced similar CDVA outcomes but better UCNVA as bilateral implantation with the AT LARA. Intermediate VA outcomes were similar between the two groups.