ESCRS - FP25.02 - Comparison Of Refractive And Visual Outcomes Between Asian And European Populations 6 Months After Bilateral Diffractive Trifocal Iol Implantation

Comparison Of Refractive And Visual Outcomes Between Asian And European Populations 6 Months After Bilateral Diffractive Trifocal Iol Implantation

Published 2024 - 42nd Congress of the ESCRS

Reference: FP25.02 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/afzk-1g86

Authors: Santiago Tañá-Sanz* 1 , Pedro Tañá-Sanz 1 , Paz Orts-Vila 1 , Pedro Tañá-Rivero 1 , Yih-Shiou Hwang 2 , Chiun-Ho Ho 2 , Jiahn-Shing Lee 2 , Hung-Chi Chen 2 , Kuo-Hsuan Hung 2 , Ying-Chen Huang 2

1Oftalvist,Alicante,Spain, 2Department of Ophthalmology,Chang Gung Memorial Hospital ,Taoyuan City,Taiwan, Province of China

Purpose

To compare the visual and refractive outcomes between Asian and European populations 6 months after implantation

Setting

Oftalvist, Alicante (Spain), and Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan City (Taiwan) 

Methods

Two groups of 25 patients each were included. The groups were not significantly different (p>0.05). Asian population data was collected in Taiwan (5 male, 20 female. Mean age 68.16±7.04 years [range 55 to 83 years]) and European population data was collected in Spain (4 male, 21 female. Mean age 67.24±7.76 years [range 52 to 84 years]). Refractive error was determined by subjective refraction, defocus curves (+2 to -4 D) and visual acuity at distance, intermediate and near were determined with the CTS system using Landolt C charts for comparison between groups.

Results

Visual acuities were significantly different between both groups, except for CIVA (p=0.067) and CNVA (p=0.058). Visual acuity was about 1 line better for the European. Defocus curves yielded significant differences at vergences of +2.00D, +1.50D, +0.50D, 0.00D, -1.50D. Despite this difference 91% of patients in Asian group report no difficulty in everyday life, while 72% in European group, and 86% of patients in Asian group are either satisfied or very satisfied, compared to 88% in the European group.

Conclusions

Despite some statistically significant differences were found in the clinical measures between both groups, patients reported outcomes showed similar satisfaction