&lt;p&gt;Astigmatic Results of a Diffractive Trifocal Toric IOL Following Intraoperative Aberrometry Guidance&lt;/p&gt;

Blaylock, John F; Hall, Brad

doi:10.2147/opth.s285711

Cited by 17 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 5 Corrective surgery for astigmatism includes corneal incisions, corneal refractive surgery, and toric IOL implantation. 4 Moreover, improved visual outcomes have been reported with the use of toric IOLs than with other corrective surgeries for astigmatism, such as corneal incisions and corneal refractive surgery. 4 Besides refractive accuracy of the postoperative spherical equivalent, reduced postoperative residual astigmatism (≤0.75 D) also plays a crucial role in improving UCVA with trifocal IOLs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Refractive Accuracy of ORA and the Factors Impacting Residual Astigmatism in Patients Implanted with Trifocal IOLs During Cataract Surgery: A Retrospective Observational Study

Watanabe¹

2022

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To assess the refractive accuracy of the intraoperative aberrometer Optiwave Refractive Analysis (ORA) and evaluate factors impacting residual astigmatism in eyes implanted with PanOptix (TFNT) trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) during cataract surgery. Patients and Methods This retrospective study examined 180 eyes implanted with a toric or non-toric trifocal IOL during cataract surgery. The mean refractive prediction error (RPE), median absolute RPE, and percentage of eyes with an absolute RPE ≤0.25, ≤0.50, ≤0.75, and ≤1.00 diopter (D) were determined for ORA and each of the IOL power formulas (Sanders–‍Retzlaff–Kraft/Theoretical [SRK/T], Barrett Universal II, and Haigis). Correlation analysis of postoperative residual astigmatism and factors associated with it was performed using Pearson’s and Spearman correlations in eyes with non-toric trifocal IOLs. Results After optimization, the median absolute RPE was 0.19 D, 0.25 D, 0.20 D, and 0.26 D in eyes measured using ORA and the SRK/T, Barrett Universal II, and Haigis formulas, respectively. An absolute RPE ≤0.50 D after optimization was noted in 92.8%, 83.3%, 88.3%, and 81.1% of the eyes using ORA and the SRK/T (p=0.0093), Barrett Universal II (p=0.2071), and Haigis (p=0.0018) formulas, respectively, showing significant differences between ORA and the SRK/T and Haigis formulas. The mean±standard deviation subjective residual astigmatism in non-toric IOL eyes (N=76) was 0.46±0.39 D and showed a strong positive correlation with preoperative objective refractive astigmatism ( r =0.2925, p=0.0109), intraoperative ORA–measured astigmatism ( r =0.5555, p<0.0001), postoperative objective refractive astigmatism ( r =0.8188, p<0.0001), and postoperative total corneal astigmatism (TCA) ( r =0.4051, p=0.0003) and a negative correlation with preoperative anterior corneal astigmatism ( r =−0.3541, p=0.0017). Conclusion ORA is a salient tool for improving the postoperative refractive accuracy of trifocal IOL power calculations and may help in determining the need for toric IOL use in astigmatic eyes with cataracts. Residual astigmatism correlated with objective refractive astigmatism, ORA-measured astigmatism, and postoperative TCA.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Refractive Accuracy of ORA and the Factors Impacting Residual Astigmatism in Patients Implanted with Trifocal IOLs During Cataract Surgery: A Retrospective Observational Study

Watanabe¹

2022

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other studies have shown similar results in eyes without a history of LVC. 18 , 20 , 21 Therefore, it would appear that the use of IA results in less postoperative astigmatism than preoperative planning alone in post-LVC eyes. With less PRA, both surgeons and patients benefit as there is less need for an enhancement procedure postoperatively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Refractive Outcomes Following Trifocal Intraocular Lens Implantation in Post-Myopic LASIK and PRK Eyes

Blaylock¹,

Hall²

2022

OPTH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To assess refractive outcomes of a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) in post-myopic laser refractive surgery eyes. Methods This was a retrospective chart review of 35 eyes (21 patients), with history of laser refractive surgery, who were implanted with a trifocal IOL. Surgeon’s standard procedure included femtosecond laser (FLACS), digital registration, and intraoperative aberrometry (IA). The primary outcome measure was absolute prediction error. Secondary measures were refractive outcomes, postoperative residual astigmatism (PRA), monocular uncorrected visual acuity at distance (UDVA; 4m), intermediate (UIVA; 60cm), and near (UNVA; 40cm), and monocular best-corrected visual acuity at distance (BCVA; 4m). Results At 3 months postoperatively, 71% and 68% of eyes had absolute prediction error 0.5 D or less with IA and preoperative planning respectively, which was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The PRA was 0.5 D or less in 91% of eyes with IA and 56% of eyes with preoperative planning. The PRA differences between IA and preoperative planning were statistically significant (p < 0.002). The percentage of eyes 20/20 or better for monocular UCVA, BCVA, UIVA, and UNVA was 29%, 77%, 78%, and 66%, respectively. Absolute prediction error 0.5 D or less was significantly higher in post-LASIK eyes versus post-PRK eyes (p < 0.003), at 85% and 56% of eyes, respectively. Conclusion Implantation with a trifocal IOL can provide acceptable refractive and visual outcomes with minimal residual astigmatism in post-myopic LASIK and PRK eyes.

show abstract

“… 4 , 10 We recently published a comparison of the postoperative residual astigmatism (PRA) of the PanOptix trifocal toric (Alcon Vision, LLC, Fort Worth, TX, USA), which followed the ORA recommendation, to back-calculated residual astigmatism (BRA; determined via vector analysis using preoperative cylinder power) that would have resulted using the cylinder power calculated preoperatively. 11 We reported that the proportion of eyes with PRA ≤0.50D was significantly higher using IA (97.8%) versus the preoperative planned cylinder power (87.3%), and that the absolute prediction error (SE) was significantly lower with IA compared to preoperative planning. 11 The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate clinical outcomes of a monofocal toric IOL using digital tracking (DT) and IA and compare it to back-calculated refractive outcomes, which simulate implantation of the preoperative planned power.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“… 11 We reported that the proportion of eyes with PRA ≤0.50D was significantly higher using IA (97.8%) versus the preoperative planned cylinder power (87.3%), and that the absolute prediction error (SE) was significantly lower with IA compared to preoperative planning. 11 The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate clinical outcomes of a monofocal toric IOL using digital tracking (DT) and IA and compare it to back-calculated refractive outcomes, which simulate implantation of the preoperative planned power.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Clinical Outcomes of Monofocal Toric IOLs Using Digital Tracking and Intraoperative Aberrometry

Blaylock¹,

Hall²

2021

OPTH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To evaluate clinical outcomes of a toric IOL using digital tracking (DT) and intraoperative aberrometry (IA). Methods This was a retrospective, single surgeon study examining 151 eyes of 106 patients. Inclusion criteria were subjects who presented with visually significant cataracts (or as a candidate for clear lens extraction) and were implanted with a toric intraocular lens. Spherical equivalent prediction errors for IA and preoperative planning were calculated and compared. Preoperative and postoperative refractive data and monocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) were also collected at 3 months postoperatively. Results Postoperative actual residual refractive astigmatism with IA was 0.50 D or less in 140 eyes (92.8%) and was 0.50 D or less in 88 eyes (58.3%) with back-calculations based on preoperative planning. The absolute spherical equivalent prediction error was 0.50 D or less in 135 eyes (89.4%) for IA compared to 123 eyes (85.4%) for preoperative planning. Postoperative monocular UDVA was 0.10 logMAR or better in 124 eyes (82.1%) and 0.00 logMAR or better in 90 eyes (59.6%). Postoperative CDVA was 0.10 logMAR or better in 147 eyes (97.4%) and 134 eyes (88.7%) were 0.00 logMAR or better. Conclusion The results demonstrate that toric implantation with DT and IA can provide excellent refractive and visual outcomes.

show abstract

<p>Astigmatic Results of a Diffractive Trifocal Toric IOL Following Intraoperative Aberrometry Guidance</p>

Cited by 17 publications

References 19 publications

Evaluation of Refractive Accuracy of ORA and the Factors Impacting Residual Astigmatism in Patients Implanted with Trifocal IOLs During Cataract Surgery: A Retrospective Observational Study

Evaluation of Refractive Accuracy of ORA and the Factors Impacting Residual Astigmatism in Patients Implanted with Trifocal IOLs During Cataract Surgery: A Retrospective Observational Study

Refractive Outcomes Following Trifocal Intraocular Lens Implantation in Post-Myopic LASIK and PRK Eyes

Clinical Outcomes of Monofocal Toric IOLs Using Digital Tracking and Intraoperative Aberrometry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About