Eyeworld

EW REFRACTIVE 70 September 2018 by Stefanie Petrou Binder, MD, EyeWorld Contributing Writer using MFIOLs usually comes at the price of diminished far or near visual performance. European cataract surgeons have had great outcomes using trifocal IOLs, and some of the first comparative studies are out, allowing physicians to gauge the differences in these IOLs and choose the right technology for patients. Data from a study that com- pared a newer model diffractive IOL with an older model that were first presented as an e-poster at the 22nd ESCRS Winter Meeting demon- strated good outcomes in near, intermediate, and far visual acuity, and underlined how a thorough understanding of MFIOL capacity is essential in meeting each patient's visual needs. Detlev Breyer, MD, Breyer, Kay- mak & Klabe Eye Surgery and Premi- um Eyes, Düsseldorf, Germany, the Two trifocals tested and compared Implanted AT LISA tri Source: Breyer Kaymak Klabe Augenchirurgie The trifocal AcrySof IQ PanOptix IOL matched the AT LISA diffractive IOL for intermediate and far visual acuity and showed an advantage for near vision in study T rifocal IOLs may be a pa- tient's best bet for achiev- ing a full range of vision. Spectacle-free intermedi- ate vision is arguably the most sought after visual correction among patients opting for premium lenses, allowing them to carry out the majority of their daily activities without the use of glasses. However, surgeons have found that striving to attain spectacle independence continued on page 72 European cataract surgeons have had great outcomes using trifocal IOLs, and some of the first comparative studies are out, allowing physicians to gauge the differences in these IOLs and choose the right technology for patients. first author of the e-poster, said that both trifocal IOLs offered a broad range of good binocular vision. Study data The study involved the implanta- tion of the AcrySof IQ PanOptix (Alcon, Fort Worth, Texas) in 20 eyes and the AT LISA tri (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany) in 372 eyes. The male to female ratio in the AcrySof IQ study group was 34:66, and the patients had a mean age of 59.2 ± 10.7 years. In the AT LISA group, the male to female ratio was 50:50 with a mean patient age of 64.4 ± 7.2 years. The mean spherical equivalent (SE) in the AcrySof IQ group was –0.4 ± 3.9 D, and the mean cylinder was –1.1 ± 1.0 D. Preoperatively, the corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was logMAR 0.20 ± 0.18 and the uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was logMAR 0.62 ± 0.40. The mean IOL power used in the group was 20.6 ± 5.2 D and the target SE was –0.13 ± 0.20 D. AT LISA patients had a mean SE of 0.4 ± 3.8 D and a mean cylinder of –0.4 ± 0.3 D. The group had a mean CDVA of logMAR 0.15 ± 0.20 and a mean UDVA of logMAR 0.71 ± 0.32. The mean IOL power was 22.2 ± 3.9 D, and the target SE was –0.13 ± 0.25 D. Predictable visual outcomes According to Dr. Breyer, the pre- dictability of an intraocular device can be calculated by subtracting the target SE from the actual postopera- tive SE. In the 20 PanOptix patients, the difference in SE was –0.19 ± 0.54 D, while in 269 AT LISA patients, the difference between target and postoperative SE was 0.08 ± 0.62. The difference in SE was less than or equal to 0.5 D in 70.0% of Pan- Optix patients and 66.2% of AT LISA patients; it was less than or equal to 1.0 D in 90% of PanOptix patients and in 93.3% of AT LISA patients. The study showed a comparable deviation from target refraction after 3 months, with slight but significant undercorrection in the PanOptix group (p<.05). Dr. Breyer thinks that more data is needed. The outcomes from binocular defocus curves revealed that the PanOptix eyes (n=10) achieved sig- nificantly better near vision (p<.05) than AT LISA eyes did. The AT LISA eyes (n=36) achieved slightly better outcomes for far visual acuity. Both lenses demonstrated similar MFIOL capacities and showed vast improve- ments for intermediate and near vision when compared to monofo- cal IOLs. Presentation spotlight

• Blank Page
• Blank Page (1)