Laureano A Rementería-Capelo1, Inés Contreras2, Jorge L García-Pérez1, Vanesa Blázquez3, Javier Ruiz-Alcocer4. 1. Clínica Rementería, Spain. 2. Clínica Rementería, Spain; Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Instituto Ramón y Cajal de Investigaciones Sanitarias, Spain. 3. Clínica Rementería, Spain; Optics and Optometry Department, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain. 4. Optics and Optometry Department, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain. Electronic address: jruizalcocer@ucm.es.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess and compare the visual quality and subjective outcomes of a trifocal spherical intraocular lens (IOL) and its new toric version. SETTING: Clínica Rementería, Madrid, Spain. DESIGN: Prospective case series. METHODS: Patients had bilateral implantation of the AcrySof IQ PanOptix spherical or toric IOL. Three months postoperatively, monocular and the binocular uncorrected and corrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuities; binocular defocus curves; and binocular contrast sensitivity function (CSF) were assessed. Patient satisfaction was evaluated with the Catquest 9SF questionnaire. RESULTS: The study comprised 250 eyes (166 with spherical IOL; 84 with toric IOL) of 125 patients. Both groups had good monocular visual acuity at all distances with no statistically significant differences between groups. The mean monocular uncorrected acuity in the spherical group was 0.06 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) ± 0.07 (SD), 0.20 ± 0.10 logMAR, and 0.05 ± 0.07 logMAR for far, intermediate, and near, respectively, and in the toric group, 0.07 ± 0.10 logMAR, 0.23 ± 0.20 logMAR, and 0.07 ± 0.12 logMAR, respectively. Defocus curves showed a visual acuity of 0.1 logMAR or better between -2.5 diopters (D) and +0.5 D with no differences between groups. The CSF values were within normal ranges with both IOLs. The questionnaire showed high rates of patient satisfaction with no differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The visual outcomes with the 2 IOLs were similar. With optimum implantation and alignment, the trifocal toric IOL seems to provide visual quality and patient satisfaction that is equivalent to that with the nontoric version with the same platform.
PURPOSE: To assess and compare the visual quality and subjective outcomes of a trifocal spherical intraocular lens (IOL) and its new toric version. SETTING: Clínica Rementería, Madrid, Spain. DESIGN: Prospective case series. METHODS:Patients had bilateral implantation of the AcrySof IQ PanOptix spherical or toric IOL. Three months postoperatively, monocular and the binocular uncorrected and corrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuities; binocular defocus curves; and binocular contrast sensitivity function (CSF) were assessed. Patient satisfaction was evaluated with the Catquest 9SF questionnaire. RESULTS: The study comprised 250 eyes (166 with spherical IOL; 84 with toric IOL) of 125 patients. Both groups had good monocular visual acuity at all distances with no statistically significant differences between groups. The mean monocular uncorrected acuity in the spherical group was 0.06 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) ± 0.07 (SD), 0.20 ± 0.10 logMAR, and 0.05 ± 0.07 logMAR for far, intermediate, and near, respectively, and in the toric group, 0.07 ± 0.10 logMAR, 0.23 ± 0.20 logMAR, and 0.07 ± 0.12 logMAR, respectively. Defocus curves showed a visual acuity of 0.1 logMAR or better between -2.5 diopters (D) and +0.5 D with no differences between groups. The CSF values were within normal ranges with both IOLs. The questionnaire showed high rates of patient satisfaction with no differences between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The visual outcomes with the 2 IOLs were similar. With optimum implantation and alignment, the trifocal toric IOL seems to provide visual quality and patient satisfaction that is equivalent to that with the nontoric version with the same platform.