Intraindividual Comparison Of Visual Performance And Satisfaction With Sulcoflex Trifocal Supplementary Intraocular Lens In Conjunction With Enhanced Monofocal (Rayone Emv) Versus Standard Monofocal (Rayone Aspheric) Intraocular Lens
Published 2024 - 42nd Congress of the ESCRS
Reference: FP21.06 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/e634-zc68
Authors: Günal Kahraman* 1 , Laura Schaurhofer 1 , Stefan Puchner 1 , Konstantin Seiller-tarbuk 1 , Michael Amon 1
1Ophthalmology ,Academic Teaching Hospital of St Johns ,Vienna,Austria
Purpose
The study investigates the performance of the Sulcoflex Trifocal supplementary intraocular lens (IOL) in combination with the enhanced monofocal intraocular lens (RayOne EMV) compared to a monofocal IOL (RayOne Aspheric) combined with Sulcoflex Trifocal. The hypothesis posits that the synergistic effect of combining the increased depth of field IOL and theTrifocal supplementary IOL will further enhance spectacle independence in patients. Our study employs an interindividual comparison, focusing on one eye with the Rayner EMV and Sulcoflex Trifocal combination, while the other eye receives the monofocal IOL with Sulcoflex Trifocal.
The primary objectives are to evaluate visual outcomes and patient satisfaction following Duet implantation.
Setting
Department of Ophthalmology. Academic Teaching Hospital St.Johns Vienna.
Krankenhaus der Barmherzige Brüder Wien
Methods
This study employed double-blinded design, ensuring both subjects and the performing surgeon remained unaware of which eye received the enhanced monofocal intraocular lens (IOL). Eyes were randomized, and surgeries were conducted on the same day bilaterally by the same surgeon. 38 Patients is included. The primary objective was to achieve a target refraction of zero diopters for both eyes, promoting uniformity in postoperative outcomes.
At the four-month mark post-surgery, a comprehensive assessment was conducted, encompassing defocus curves, patient satisfaction surveys, and contrast sensitivity testing.
Results
Patients in both groups exhibited similar defocus curves, indicating consistent visual acuity across a range of defocus levels. Contrast sensitivity results also showed no statistically significant distinctions, highlighting equivalent performance in terms of image discrimination and clarity. Importantly, patient satisfaction was remarkably high in both groups, indicating a favorable subjective experience with either approach. One subject received an Sulcoflex Trifocal exchange on the RayOne EMV eye due to +0.5 D refraction.
Conclusions
Our findings suggest that capsular bag implantation of a enhanced monofocal IOL with a trifocal supplementary IOL can yield visual outcomes and patient satisfaction comparable to the traditional monofocal IOL with trifocal supplementary IOL. The extended blinding to patient preferences contributes to the robustness of the study findings, offering a thorough exploration of the comparative effectiveness of the Sulcoflex Trifocal supplementary IOL in conjunction with the enhanced monofocal (RayOne EMV) versus the standard monofocal (RayOne Aspheric) intraocular lens.