ESCRS - FP14.09 - Comparing The Visual Performance And Patient Satisfaction In Cataract Patients With Two Toric Non-Diffractive Increased Range Of Focus Intraocular Lenses (Iols) Using Mini-Monovision

Comparing The Visual Performance And Patient Satisfaction In Cataract Patients With Two Toric Non-Diffractive Increased Range Of Focus Intraocular Lenses (Iols) Using Mini-Monovision

Published 2024 - 42nd Congress of the ESCRS

Reference: FP14.09 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/gzrj-kz76

Authors: Pascal Rozot* 1 , Olivier Prisant 2

1BdR,SCP Rozot et Associes,France,France, 2Paris,Clinique de la Vision,France,France

Purpose

To compare binocular visual acuities and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) with TECNIS Eyhance toric IOLs (J&J Vision) using negative spherical aberration and RayOne EMV Toric IOL (RAO210T, Rayner) using positive spherical aberration.

Setting

Clinique Juge, Marseille, France; Clinique de la Vision, Paris, France

Methods

A retrospective analysis of patients divided into two groups and implanted binocularly with Tecnis Eyhance Toric (Group T) or RayOne EMV Toric (Group R). The target refraction for the non-dominant eye was between -0.5D and -0.75D and plano in the dominant eye to achieve mini-monovision. The monocular and binocular postoperative examinations included uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) at 67 cm) and uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) at 40 cm. Postoperative corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was measured monocularly. PROMs will be collected using the RayPRO digital application which includes the CAT-PROM5 questionnaire. Quality of vision is also included in this evaluation.

Results

This interim analysis included 30 eyes of 19 patients (of a total 60) for Group R. At one month postoperatively the mean refractive spherical equivalent for the non-dominant and dominant eyes was -0.25D and -0.04D in the emmetropic subgroup (Group RE) and -0.71 and -0.125D in the mini-monovision subgroup (Group RM), respectively. Binocular UDVA, UIVA and UNVA was 0.0±0.05, 0.1±0.01 and 0.2±0.14 (Group RE), respectively and 0.03±0.04, 0.06±0.1 and 0.06±0.09 (Group RM), respectively. For all eyes monocular and binocular CDVA, UDVA, UIVA and UNVA was 0.01±0.04, 0.08±0.12, 0.14±0.12, 0.22±0.16, and 0.02±0.05, 0.08±0.07, 0.13±0.13, respectively. The analysis for Group T is ongoing and will be statistically compared to Group R.

Conclusions

The data suggests that patients can achieve better uncorrected vision at all distances with Toric RayOne EMV and Toric Eyhance implanted binocularly with a monovision target compared to both eyes targeted for plano. Further analysis is needed to investigate how these findings compare to other enhanced monofocal lenses in a similar set-up.