ESCRS - PP15.10 - Comparison Of Reading And Optical Performance After Contralateral Versus Bilateral Diffractive Iol Implantation Under Different Illumination Conditions

Comparison Of Reading And Optical Performance After Contralateral Versus Bilateral Diffractive Iol Implantation Under Different Illumination Conditions

Published 2026 - 44th Congress of the ESCRS

Reference: PP15.10 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/208f-kh20

Authors: Dr Vaibhav Vishal* 1 , Dr Naren Shetty 2 , Dr Rohitha Nayak 3 , Dr Abhijit Sinha Roy 4

1Cataract and Refractive ,Narayana Nethralaya,Bengaluru,India;Cataract and Refractive,Narayana Nethralaya,Bengaluru,India, 2Cataract and Refractive,Narayana Nethralaya,Bengaluru,India, 3Cataract,Narayana Nethralaya,Bengaluru,India, 4Imaging, Biomechanics, and Mathematical Modeling,Narayana Nethralaya,Bengaluru,India

Purpose

To compare visual and reading performance between a contralateral diffractive intraocular lens implantation and bilateral implantation strategies of an established diffractive intraocular lens.

Setting

Narayana Nethralaya Superspecialty Eye Hospital, Bangalore, India.

Methods

This prospective, randomized, interventional, single-center study included 60 patients undergoing cataract surgery, divided into two groups (n = 30 each). Group A received contralateral implantation of Vivinex Gemetric IOL (HOYA Surgical Optics) in the right eye and a Vivinex Gemetric Plus IOL in the left eye (pairing approach), while Group B received bilateral Patients aged 40–70 years with cataracts were included. Reading and overall optical performance were assessed one month postoperatively under varying illumination conditions. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA, paired t-tests, and the Friedman test.

Results

Both groups achieved comparable one‑month uncorrected far, intermediate, and near visual acuities, with median values indicating excellent distance and good intermediate and near vision. Reading performance at 33cm remained stable across all illumination levels, maintaining consistent values from 180 Lux down to 10 Lux for both groups. Group A achieved statistically significant higher internal Modulation Transfer Function (MTF) values compared to Group B (A= 0.6, B= 0.51; p = 0.002). Contrast sensitivity remained comparable between groups, with a slight numerical advantage for the Group A at 6 cpd (A=6.00 vs B=5.90) and 12 cpd (A=5.64 vs. B=5.30) but this was not statistically significant.

 

Conclusions

Contralateral implantation of Vivinex Gemetric and Vivinex Gemetric Plus produced visual acuity, reading performance, and contrast sensitivity outcomes comparable to bilateral implantation of an established diffractive intraocular lens. Reading performance remained stable across illumination levels in both groups. Higher internal modulation transfer function values were observed with the contralateral‑implantation strategy of Vivinex Gemetric and Vivinex Gemetric Plus, supporting the pairing approach as an effective diffractive implantation strategy.