One-year post-operative comparison of visual function and patient satisfaction with trifocal and extended depth of focus intraocular lenses

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate visual performance with trifocal and extended depth of focus IOL at 1 year post-operatively.

Setting

BMI Southend Hospital.

Design

Cohort study.

Methods

An age-matched cohort of forty subjects bilaterally implanted with the AT LISA 839MP trifocal IOL (20 patients, 40 eyes) and the Tecnis Symfony extended depth of focus IOL (20 patients, 40 eyes) were assessed at 3–6 months and 12–18 months post-operatively. Primary outcome measures were distance (6 m), intermediate (70 cm), near visual acuity (40 cm), and analysis of defocus profiles. Secondary outcomes included contrast sensitivity, Radner reading performance, quality of vision and assessment of halos.

Results

Distance visual acuity (VA) and defocus areas were similar (p = 0.07). No significant difference in intermediate VA was noted but the intermediate area of focus was greater in the EDoF (0.31 ± 0.12 LogMAR*m⁻¹) compared to the trifocal (0.22 ± 0.08LogMAR*m⁻¹) (p = 0.02). However, all near metrics were significantly better in the trifocal group. 80% of trifocal subjects were spectacle independent compared to 50% EDoF subjects. Quality of vision questionnaire found no significant differences between groups, however halo scores were greater at 3–6 months in the trifocal group (p < 0.01) but no differences were noted at 12–18 months.

Conclusions

Near vision is significantly better for the trifocal, thus greater levels of spectacle independence. The range of intermediate vision was greater for the EDoF but no difference in intermediate VA. In the early period, differences in contrast sensitivity and halo size/intensity were noted, however, by one-year these measures were not significantly different.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Madrid-Costa

Ruiz-Alcocer

Ferrer-Blasco

, et al. Optical quality differences between three multifocal intraocular lenses: bifocal low add, bifocal moderate add, and trifocal. J Refract Surg 2013; 29: 749–754.

Carson

Hill

Hong

, et al. Optical bench performance of AcrySof((R)) IQ ReSTOR((R)), AT LISA((R)) tri, and FineVision((R)) intraocular lenses. Clin Ophthalmol 2014; 8: 2105–2113.

Shen

Lin

Zhu

, et al. Clinical comparison of patient outcomes following implantation of trifocal or bifocal intraocular lenses: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep 2017; 7: 45337.

Yang

Liu

, et al. Comparison of visual outcomes with implantation of trifocal versus bifocal intraocular lens after phacoemulsification: a meta-analysis. Int J Ophthalmol 2018; 11: 484–492.

Cochener

. Prospective clinical comparison of patient outcomes following implantation of trifocal or bifocal intraocular lenses. J Refract Surg 2016; 32: 146–151.

Cochener

Concerto Study

. Clinical outcomes of a new extended range of vision intraocular lens: international multicenter concerto study. J Cataract Refract Surg 2016; 42: 1268–1275.

Cochener

Boutillier

Lamard

, et al. A comparative evaluation of a New generation of diffractive trifocal and extended depth of focus intraocular lenses. J Refract Surg 2018; 34: 507–514.

Mencucci

Favuzza

Caporossi

, et al. Comparative analysis of visual outcomes, reading skills, contrast sensitivity, and patient satisfaction with two models of trifocal diffractive intraocular lenses and an extended range of vision intraocular lens. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2018; 256: 1913–1922.

Pedrotti

Carones

Aiello

, et al. Comparative analysis of visual outcomes with 4 intraocular lenses: monofocal, multifocal, and extended range of vision. J Cataract Refract Surg 2018; 44: 156–167.

10.

Monaco

Gari

Di Censo

, et al. Visual performance after bilateral implantation of 2 new presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses: trifocal versus extended range of vision. J Cataract Refract Surg 2017; 43: 737–747.

11.

Webers

VSC

Bauer

NJC

Saelens

IEY

, et al. Comparison of the intermediate distance of a trifocal IOL with an extended depth-of-focus IOL: results of a prospective randomized trial. J Cataract Refract Surg 2020; 46: 193–203.

12.

Kohnen

Suryakumar

. Extended depth-of-focus technology in intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 2020; 46: 298–304.

13.

Sudhir

Dey

Bhattacharrya

, et al. Acrysof IQ PanOptix intraocular Lens versus extended depth of focus intraocular Lens and trifocal intraocular Lens: a clinical overview. Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila) 2019; 8: 335–349.

14.

Lubinski

Podboraczynska-Jodko

Kirkiewicz

, et al. Comparison of visual outcomes after implantation of AtLisa tri 839 MP and symfony intraocular lenses. Int Ophthalmol 2020; 40: 2553–2562.

15.

Wolffsohn

Jinabhai

Kingsnorth

, et al. Exploring the optimum step size for defocus curves. J Cataract Refract Surg 2013; 39: 873–880.

16.

Gupta

Wolffsohn

Naroo

. Optimizing measurement of subjective amplitude of accommodation with defocus curves. J Cataract Refract Surg 2008; 34: 1329–1338.

17.

Radner

Diendorfer

Kainrath

, et al. The accuracy of reading speed measurement by stopwatch versus measurement with an automated computer program (rad-rd(c)). Acta Ophthalmol 2017; 95: 211–216.

18.

Law

Aggarwal

Kasaby

. Clinical outcomes with a new trifocal intraocular lens. Eur J Ophthalmol 2014; 24: 501–508.

19.

Buckhurst

Wolffsohn

Gupta

, et al. Development of a questionnaire to assess the relative subjective benefits of presbyopia correction. J Cataract Refract Surg 2012; 38: 74–79.

20.

Gatinel

Loicq

. Clinically relevant optical properties of bifocal, trifocal, and extended depth of focus intraocular lenses. J Refract Surg 2016; 32: 273–280.

21.

Yoo

Whang

Byun

, et al. Through-Focus optical bench performance of extended depth-of-focus and bifocal intraocular lenses compared to a monofocal Lens. J Refract Surg 2018; 34: 236–243.

22.

Rodov

Reitblat

Levy

, et al. Visual outcomes and patient satisfaction for trifocal, extended depth of focus and monofocal intraocular lenses. J Refract Surg 2019; 35: 434–440.

23.

Ganesh

Brar

Pawar

, et al. Visual and refractive outcomes following bilateral implantation of extended range of vision intraocular Lens with micromonovision. J Ophthalmol 2018; 2018: 7321794.

24.

Hogarty

Russell

Ward

, et al. Comparing visual acuity, range of vision and spectacle independence in the extended range of vision and monofocal intraocular lens. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2018; 46: 854–860.

25.

Palomino-Bautista

Sanchez-Jean

Carmona-Gonzalez

, et al. Subjective and objective depth of field measures in pseudophakic eyes: comparison between extended depth of focus, trifocal and bifocal intraocular lenses. Int Ophthalmol 2020; 40: 351–359.