Clinical Retinal Image Quality of a Non-diffractive Wavefront-Shaping Extended Depth of Focus (Vivity) Intraocular Lens.
Journal of Refractive Surgery 2023 Februrary
PURPOSE: To evaluate clinical retinal optical image quality following implantation of an extended depth of focus intraocular lens (EDOF IOL) (Vivity; Alcon Laboratories, Inc), and to compare it with a monofocal and a trifocal IOL.
METHODS: This prospective, comparative, case-control study included 88 eyes implanted with: (1) 19 monofocal IOLs (AcrySof SA60AT; Alcon Laboratories, Inc); (2) 38 EDOF IOLs (AcrySof IQ Vivity); and (3) 31 trifocal IOLs (AT LISA tri 839MP; Carl Zeiss Meditec AG). Total root mean square, ocular lower (LOA) and higher (HOA) order aberrations, point spread function (PSF) Strehl ratio (PSF with LOA), and PSF Strehl ratio excluding LOA (PSF without LOA) were analyzed using a Pyramidal WaveFront-based sensor aberrometer Osiris (Costruzione Strumenti Oftalmici) at two different pupil sizes (3 and 4 mm).
RESULTS: The trifocal IOL showed the highest PSF without LOA at both pupil sizes (0.52 ± 0.12 and 0.31 ± 0.07, respectively), followed by the AcrySof SA60AT (0.39 ± 0.10 and 0.27 ± 0.07) and AcrySof IQ Vivity (0.34 ± 0.11 and 0.24 ± 0.09) ( P < .001). The AcrySof IQ Vivity and monofocal IOLs were comparable ( P > .05). Despite the comparable postoperative low spherical equivalent among the IOL groups, the AT LISA tri 839MP retinal image quality (PSF with LOA) was the most severely affected by such residual refractive errors (dropped to 0.26 ± 0.06 at 3 mm; P < .001) compared to the monofocal AcrySof SA60AT (0.24 ± 0.07 at 3 mm) and EDOF Acrysof IQ Vivity (0.23 ± 0.06 at 3 mm) groups. The PSF with LOA was comparable ( P > .05) among the three groups at both the 3-and 4-mm pupil size.
CONCLUSIONS: Although trifocal IOLs provided significantly better retinal image quality if influence of LOA is excluded, they also demonstrated to be the most sensitive to residual refractive errors. Both the EDOF Acrysof IQ Vivity and mono-focal AcrySof SA60AT IOLs showed a comparable retinal image quality, and they are also comparable with trifocal IOLs when considering the clinically real PSF (PSF with LOA). [ J Refract Surg . 2023;39(2):103-110.] .
METHODS: This prospective, comparative, case-control study included 88 eyes implanted with: (1) 19 monofocal IOLs (AcrySof SA60AT; Alcon Laboratories, Inc); (2) 38 EDOF IOLs (AcrySof IQ Vivity); and (3) 31 trifocal IOLs (AT LISA tri 839MP; Carl Zeiss Meditec AG). Total root mean square, ocular lower (LOA) and higher (HOA) order aberrations, point spread function (PSF) Strehl ratio (PSF with LOA), and PSF Strehl ratio excluding LOA (PSF without LOA) were analyzed using a Pyramidal WaveFront-based sensor aberrometer Osiris (Costruzione Strumenti Oftalmici) at two different pupil sizes (3 and 4 mm).
RESULTS: The trifocal IOL showed the highest PSF without LOA at both pupil sizes (0.52 ± 0.12 and 0.31 ± 0.07, respectively), followed by the AcrySof SA60AT (0.39 ± 0.10 and 0.27 ± 0.07) and AcrySof IQ Vivity (0.34 ± 0.11 and 0.24 ± 0.09) ( P < .001). The AcrySof IQ Vivity and monofocal IOLs were comparable ( P > .05). Despite the comparable postoperative low spherical equivalent among the IOL groups, the AT LISA tri 839MP retinal image quality (PSF with LOA) was the most severely affected by such residual refractive errors (dropped to 0.26 ± 0.06 at 3 mm; P < .001) compared to the monofocal AcrySof SA60AT (0.24 ± 0.07 at 3 mm) and EDOF Acrysof IQ Vivity (0.23 ± 0.06 at 3 mm) groups. The PSF with LOA was comparable ( P > .05) among the three groups at both the 3-and 4-mm pupil size.
CONCLUSIONS: Although trifocal IOLs provided significantly better retinal image quality if influence of LOA is excluded, they also demonstrated to be the most sensitive to residual refractive errors. Both the EDOF Acrysof IQ Vivity and mono-focal AcrySof SA60AT IOLs showed a comparable retinal image quality, and they are also comparable with trifocal IOLs when considering the clinically real PSF (PSF with LOA). [ J Refract Surg . 2023;39(2):103-110.] .
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app