Study on the role of simple myopic against-the-rule astigmatism in visual rehabilitation in monofocal pseudophakic patients

Sharma, Richa; Chawla, Urmil; Bura, Nisha; Khurana, Atika

doi:10.33545/26638266.2020.v2.i1a.25

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 29 However, for EDOF IOLs, near VA was significantly better with ATR than WTR astigmatism, which agrees with one study on virgin eyes 18 and few studies on monofocal IOLs. 7 , 8 , 10 , 19 , 30 The difference in astigmatism’s impact on near vision between IOLs might be due to the different lens design.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, it has been suggested that mild postoperative astigmatism may be beneficial to near vision while preserving acceptable distance vision in eyes implanted with monofocal IOLs. [7][8][9][10] To make an informed decision, surgeons should understand the tolerance to residual astigmatism of different types of MIOLs and EDOF IOLs so as to achieve acceptable vision at various distances.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative Analysis of Tolerance to Experimentally Induced Astigmatism with Three Types of Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

Chang,

Liu,

et al. 2024

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The effect of residual astigmatism and its axis on distance and near visual acuities (VAs) with multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) has not been studied extensively. This study compared the tolerance to experimentally induced residual astigmatism among bifocal, trifocal, and extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) IOLs. Patients and Methods This retrospective, comparative study included 70 eyes of 70 patients implanted with bifocal, trifocal, or EDOF IOLs. Distance and near VAs were assessed with experimentally induced astigmatism by placing positive cylindrical lenses in increments of 0.50 diopters to 2.00 diopters at 90° and 180° axes over the best distance correction. Results Both distance and near VAs worsened with increasing magnitudes of experimentally induced astigmatism except in the EDOF group, in which the near VA remained within a clinically acceptable limit, ie, within one line from the best corrected VA under all ranges of experimentally induced astigmatism. Furthermore, the EDOF group showed the highest astigmatic threshold for losing VA lines following experimental astigmatic induction at both distance and near. The distance VA was generally better at with-the-rule (WTR) than against-the-rule (ATR) astigmatism for all three IOL groups. On the other hand, the near VA was generally better at WTR than ATR astigmatism in the bifocal group, comparable between WTR and ATR astigmatism in the trifocal group, and generally better at ATR than WTR astigmatism in the EDOF group. Conclusion The EDOF IOL demonstrated the highest tolerance to experimentally induced astigmatism at both distance and near. VA was generally less affected by WTR astigmatism than ATR astigmatism, especially at distance. We proposed the residual astigmatism thresholds for clinically acceptable VA reduction in all three IOL groups.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Analysis of Tolerance to Experimentally Induced Astigmatism with Three Types of Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

Chang,

Liu,

et al. 2024

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conversely, with the same WTR astigmatism, the PSF extended horizontally will be closer to the retina with the patient reading at near vision and therefore a higher crowding effect at near vision [ 21 ]. Although these studies were based on simulated astigmatism, low residual ATR astigmatism (< 1.25 D) has also been reported to benefit near vision in pseudophakic patients implanted with monofocal IOLs in combination with a myopic shift between 0 and − 0.50 D [ 23 , 24 ]. In conclusion, targeting to a myopic simple (-1.50@90º) or mixed ATR astigmatism around 1 D with myopic spherical target <|-0.50| D could be considered an option for increasing depth of focus with monofocal IOLs (i.e.…”

Section: Tolerance To Astigmatismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing low corneal astigmatism in patients with presbyopia correcting intraocular lenses: a narrative review

Rocha‐de‐Lossada

Rodríguez‐Vallejo

Rodríguez‐Calvo‐de‐Mora

et al. 2023

BMC Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cataract surgery has become a refractive procedure in which emmetropia is the goal, with the implantation of extended depth-of-focus or multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) being the commonly selected option to restore vision beyond the far distance. The selection criteria for implanting these lenses can differ from those for monofocal IOLs and even between technologies, as eye characteristics can affect postoperative visual performance. Corneal astigmatism is an eye characteristic that can affect visual performance differently, depending on the implanted IOL. The magnitude of corneal astigmatism, the tolerance of the IOL to this astigmatism, economic aspects, comorbidities, and the efficacy of astigmatism treatment are factors that can make surgeons’ doubt as to what astigmatism treatment should be applied to each patient. This review aims to summarize the current evidence related to low astigmatism tolerance in presbyopia-correcting lenses, the efficacy achieved through corneal incisions, and their comparison with the implantation of toric IOLs.

show abstract

Study on the role of simple myopic against-the-rule astigmatism in visual rehabilitation in monofocal pseudophakic patients

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Comparative Analysis of Tolerance to Experimentally Induced Astigmatism with Three Types of Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

Comparative Analysis of Tolerance to Experimentally Induced Astigmatism with Three Types of Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

Managing low corneal astigmatism in patients with presbyopia correcting intraocular lenses: a narrative review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About