This study compared the axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), mean anterior corneal radius of curvature (Rm), and postoperative refractive outcomes obtained from two different swept-source optical coherence biometers, the ARGOS (Movu, Nagoya, Japan), which uses the segmental refractive index for each segment, and the IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany), which uses an equivalent refractive index for the entire eye. One hundred and six eyes of 106 patients with cataracts were included. The refractive outcomes using the Barrett Universal II, Haigis, Hoffer Q, and SRK/T formulas were evaluated. The mean AL, CCT, ACD, and Rm differed significantly (P < 0.001) with the IOLMaster 700 (25.22 mm, 559 µm, 3.23 mm, and 7.69 mm) compared with the ARGOS (25.14 mm, 533 µm, 3.33 mm, and 7.66 mm). The mean LTs did not differ significantly. The percentages of eyes within ±0.50 and ±1.00 diopter of the predicted refraction did not differ significantly (P > 0.05). The accuracy of the intraocular lens power calculations was clinically acceptable with both biometers, although the ocular biometry using these two biometers exhibited certain differences.

To investigate refractive stability and characterize corneal incision repair up to 3 months after implantation of a new hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lens (IOL) with hydroxyethylmethacrylate using a new automated IOL delivery system. Methods This prospective case series included 50 eyes of 50 patients undergoing phacoemulsification and implantation of the Clareon ® CNA0T0 IOL using the AutonoMe ® automated delivery system in the Department of Ophthalmology, Keio University School of Medicine. The clinical data were collected from 46 eyes of 46 patients preoperatively and 1 day, 1 week, and 1 and 3 months postoperatively. Endothelial-side incision gaping, posterior incision retraction, and Descemet's membrane detachment were recorded as present or absent using anteriorsegment optical coherence tomography postoperatively. Results The uncorrected distance and corrected distance visual acuities improved and stabilized 1 week postoperatively. The anterior chamber depth was stable from 1 week postoperatively. The subjective refraction was stable from 1 day postoperatively. Descemet's membrane detachments and endothelial-side wound gaping were seen in 19 (41.3%) eyes and 34 (73.9%) eyes 1 day postoperatively and decreased gradually. Posterior incision retraction was seen in eight eyes (17.4%) on day 1 and increased to 19 eyes (41.3%) 3 months postoperatively.

PurposeTo investigate the relationship between the functional visual acuity (FVA) and useful field of view (UFOV) in elderly drivers and assess the usefulness of the FVA test to screen driving aptitude in elderly drivers.MethodsThis study included 45 elderly drivers (31 men, 14 women; mean age, 68.1 years) and 30 younger drivers (26 men, 4 women; mean age, 34.2 years) who drive regularly. All participants underwent measurement of the binocular corrected distant visual acuity (CDVA), binocular corrected distant FVA (CDFVA), and Visual Field with Inhibitory Tasks Elderly Version (VFIT-EV) to measure UFOV. The tear function and cognitive status also were evaluated.ResultsThe CDVA, the CDFVA, cognitive status, and the correct response rate (CAR) of the VFIT-EV were significantly worse in the elderly group than in the control group (P = 0.000 for all parameters). The cognitive status was correlated significantly with the CDVA (r = -0.301, P = 0.009), CDFVA (r = -0.402, P = 0.000), and the CAR of the VFIT-EV (r = 0.348, P = 0.002) in all subjects. The results of the tear function tests were not correlated with the CDVA, CDFVA, or VFIT-EV in any subjects. Stepwise regression analysis for all subjects in the elderly and control groups showed that the CDFVA predicted the CAR most significantly among the clinical factors evaluated.ConclusionThe FVA test is a promising method to screen the driving aptitude, including both visual and cognitive functions, in a short time.

Presbyopia treatments using various modalities have been developed recently; however, no standard criteria exist for the diagnosis and treatment endpoint. This study assessed the relationship between the near visual acuity (NVA) and the subjective symptoms of phakic presbyopia and determined the numerical NVA threshold to diagnose phakic presbyopia and evaluate the effectiveness of presbyopia treatment. The binocular distance, NVA with habitual correction, and monocular conventional VA were measured. Patients were asked about their awareness of presbyopia and difficulty performing near tasks. This prospective observational study included 70 patients (mean age, 56.0 years; range, 32–77). Most patients became aware of presbyopia in their late forties, although some had difficulty with vision-related near tasks before becoming aware of presbyopia. Eighty three percent of patients (20/24) experienced difficulty with near vision-related tasks even with excellent NVA at 40 cm with habitual correction of 0.0 logMAR (20/20 in Snellen VA). In conclusion, the current study showed that patients became aware of presbyopia in their late forties, although some had difficulty with near vision-related tasks before becoming aware of presbyopia. Further investigation should include the proposal of appropriate diagnostic criteria for presbyopia and better management for patients with presbyopia.

The aim of this study was to investigate the prediction accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power formulas with artificial intelligence (AI) for high myopia. Cases of highly myopic patients (axial length [AL], >26.0 mm) undergoing uncomplicated cataract surgery with at least 1-month follow-up were included. Prediction errors, absolute errors, and percentages of eyes with prediction errors within ±0.25, ±0.50, and ±1.00 diopters (D) were compared using five formulas: Hill-RBF3.0, Kane, Barrett Universal II (BUII), Haigis, and SRK/T. Seventy eyes (mean patient age at surgery, 64.0 ± 9.0 years; mean AL, 27.8 ± 1.3 mm) were included. The prediction errors with the Hill-RBF3.0 and Kane formulas were statistically different from the BUII, Haigis, and SRK/T formulas, whereas there was not a statistically significant difference between those with the Hill-RBF3.0 and Kane. The absolute errors with the Hill-RBF3.0 and Kane formulas were smaller than that with the BUII formula, whereas there was not a statistically significant difference between the other formulas. The percentage within ±0.25 D with the Hill-RBF3.0 formula was larger than that with the BUII formula. The prediction accuracy using AI (Hill-RBF3.0 and Kane) showed excellent prediction accuracy. No significant difference was observed in the prediction accuracy between the Hill-RBF3.0 and Kane formulas.