Comparing Partial-Range Of Field Iols Of The Newest Generation

Different ‘partial-range of field IOLs’, whose lens designs differ from the classic aspheric lens design extending the focal point into the myopic range in order to increase depth of field, are to be compared in terms of their light distribution and imaging quality.

Medical Univesity of Vienna, Department of Ophthalmology and Optometry

On an optical bench with a 546 nm laser light source, a cornea with a spherical aberration of 0.2 µm and pupil apertures of 3.0 mm and 4.5 mm, the Through Focus Response (TFR) was compared for the AllRange (OphthalmoPro), Impress (Hoya), PureSee (Jonson & Jonson) TECNIS® Eyhance DIB00 (Johnson & Johnson), Vivity (Alcon), and Zoe (OphthalmoPro) was determined on an optical bench with a 546 nm laser light source, a cornea with a spherical aberration of 0.2 µm and pupil apertures of 3.0 mm and 4.5 mm. The defocus range for the TFR was -5.0 to +3.0 dioptres.  For the same defocus range, the Through Focus Response Modulation Transfer Function (TFR MTF) was determined for 50 lp/mm for the same implants.

While Impress, TECNIS® Eyhance DIB00 and Zoe only show a slight extension of the focal point in the myopic range, the AllRange, PureSee and Vivity lenses clearly show light energy for the intermediate range. The TFR MTFs show that supplying the intermediate range with more light energy affects the image quality in the distance.

Lenses that only slightly elongate the far focal point into the myopic range, such as Impress, Tecnis Eyhance DIB00, and ZOE perform slightly better at a distance than lenses that provide more light for the intermediate range, such as AllRange, PureSee and Vivity which comparatively provide better image quality in the intermediate range.