Evaluation of quality of life after implantation of a new trifocal intraocular lens

Akman, Ahmet; Asena, Leyla; Öztürk, Caner; Güngör, Sirel Gür

doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2018.12.003

Cited by 35 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Comparison with previous studies concerned with the same trifocal IOL would not be effectively achieved 11,16,18,20,21,26. The same was concluded when revised other works not dealing with the current IOL 11,13,14,29–31.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…To our knowledge, this is the first publication to include toric models from this trifocal IOL. Moreover, unilateral implantation with trifocal IOLs was rarely discussed 20,27,28…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most of the studies simply represented the answers in term of percentage of 3–4 levels of satisfaction 10–14,16,29–31. Those which chose to use scoring, used it in a descending manner (0 being the best),18,20,21,26 or ascending (0 being the worst).11 The final score also varied from 4,20 618,21,26 and 10.11…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This IOL is also designed with an intermediary 4.5 mm diffractive zone, making its performance less dependent on pupil size 15. Various reports studied the performance of the lens, whether separately16–20 or in comparison with other lenses 11,21–26. Objective and subjective assessments were included 11,15–26…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Subjective Perception Of Trifocal IOL Performance, Including Toric Models

Hamdi

2019

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo study the patients’ perception of trifocal IOL (Panoptix™) performance.Patients and methods60 eyes of 35 were implanted with trifocal IOL. Refractive (sphere – S, cylinder – Cyl and spherical equivalent – SE, all in D) and visual (distance uncorrected – VAsc, distance corrected – VAcc, intermediate – IntVA, near uncorrected – NVAsc and distance corrected near – NVAcc, all in LogMAR) results were recorded. Patients were asked about satisfaction (per eye), spectacle independence, near and intermediate activities, distance activities in quantity and quality, finally about personal facial care (per patient). Comparison was made between non-toric (48) and toric models, genders (18 males) and between bilateral (25 patients) and unilateral implantations. Results were correlated to age and IOL power.ResultsWith a SE of mean −0.3 ± 0.5 D, cases achieved mean VAsc 0.09 ± 0.1 (~20/25), VAcc 0.05 ± 0.1 (~20/22), IntVA 0.05 ± 0.9 (~20/22), NVAsc 0.05 ± 0.09 (~~20/22) and NVAcc 0.04 ± 0.8 (~~20/22). Mean level of satisfaction was 85.7 ± 16.5, spectacle independence 96.0 ± 10.6, near activities 95.4 ± 9.8, intermediate activities 97.7 ± 6.4, quantity of distance activities 90.2 ± 10.1, quality of distance activities 88.0 ± 12.1 and facial care 92.6 ± 11.9. All comparisons (non-toric and toric, male and female and bilateral and unilateral implantation) were statistically insignificant (P>0.05). Correlation with age and IOL power was also statistically insignificant (P>0.05).ConclusionAs perceived by patients, trifocal IOL resulted in very high level of satisfaction. This satisfaction is reflected on diverse visual activities. This level is achieved regardless of gender, IOL model or even unilateral implantation. It is also achieved regardless the age of patients or preoperative eye status.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…To our knowledge, this is the first publication to include toric models from this trifocal IOL. Moreover, unilateral implantation with trifocal IOLs was rarely discussed 20,27,28…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Subjective Perception Of Trifocal IOL Performance, Including Toric Models

Hamdi

2019

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…11,15,16,[18][19][20][21] This technology is called Enlighten ® Optical Technology by the manufacturer (Alcon Laboratories, Inc.) and there has been a great acceptance and patient satisfaction with this intraocular lens as the intermediate vision is very comfortable and sharp. 11,15,16,[19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] The diffractive zone is also in the central portion and occupies 4.5 mm of the optical zone. It adds a negative spherical aberration of −0.1 μm on the anterior face of the lens to compensate the positive spherical aberration generated by the average human cornea.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of visual outcomes after bilateral implantation of two intraocular lenses with distinct diffractive optics

Medeiros¹,

Saraiva²,

Iguma³

et al. 2019

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare the visual outcomes and subjective visual quality between bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus intraocular lens, J&J Vision Tecnis Symfony ® ZXR00 (Group A) and bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens, Alcon Acrysof IQ PanOptix ® TNFT00 (Group B). Methods: This prospective, nonrandomized, comparative study of consecutive cases assessed 52 eyes of 26 patients operated on by the same surgeon (WTH) and binocularly implanted with multifocal intraocular lenses between May 2016 and July 2018. Binocular visual acuity for far, intermediate and near was tested in all cases. Ophthalmological evaluation included the measurement of binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) at 40 cm, uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) at 70 cm, monocular visual defocus curve and the quality of life (QoL) questionnaire, National Eye Institute Visual Functioning Questionnaire-25 (NEI-VFQ 25). Results: Postoperative UDVA was 0.00 and 0.09 logMAR (P<0.001), UIVA was 0.20 and 0.39 logMAR (P<0.001) and UNVA was 0.16 and −0.01 logMAR (P<0.001) in groups A and B, respectively; postoperative CDVA was −0.05 and 0.06 logMAR (P<0.001) in groups A and B, respectively. Conclusion: Both groups reported good subjective quality of vision regarding long, intermediate and short distances. Group A had a better performance for binocular UDVA, UIVA at 70 cm and CDVA, while regarding the monocular defocus curve, Group A outperformed Group B for long distances. Furthermore, Group B surpassed it in the short to very short distances, between the range of ≥2.00 D to 5.00 D of vergence. While Group A had a better performance regarding the vergences between 0.00 and 1.00 D (P<0.05) and at the vergence of +2.50 D (P=0.007). Group B outran Group A for UNVA at 40 cm.

show abstract

Extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) AcrySof® IQ Vivity® intraocular lens implant: a real-life experience

Arrigo

Gambaro

Fasce

et al. 2021

Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation of quality of life after implantation of a new trifocal intraocular lens

Cited by 35 publications

References 24 publications

<p>Subjective Perception Of Trifocal IOL Performance, Including Toric Models</p>

<p>Subjective Perception Of Trifocal IOL Performance, Including Toric Models</p>

<p>Comparison of visual outcomes after bilateral implantation of two intraocular lenses with distinct diffractive optics</p>

Extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) AcrySof® IQ Vivity® intraocular lens implant: a real-life experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About