Bharat Gurnani1, Kirandeep Kaur2. 1. Consultant Cornea and Refractive Services, Aravind Eye Hospital and Post Graduate Institute of Ophthalmology, Pondicherry, India. 2. Consultant Pediatric and Squint Services, Aravind Eye Hospital and Post Graduate Institute of Ophthalmology, Pondicherry, India.
Dear Editor,As we all are aware that due to rapid evolution and technical advancements in the past decade, ophthalmic science has come a long way. The same can be seen in the advancement of various IOL designs and models. After the launch of aspherical IOLs in 2001, there have been only minor improvements in the optical performance of monofocal IOLs. With the introduction of the TECNIS Eyhance IOL, model ICB00,[1] from Johnson & Johnson Vision, the changes can be rapidly appreciated in near future. We read the article by Yangzes et al.[2] in the December 2020 issue of IJO and we must congratulate the authors for taking a leap forward and compare two recently launched newer aspheric monofocal IOL’s. However, we have a few important observations and suggestions to make.Firstly, the authors have mentioned the study as “observational consecutive case series”. But since all patients underwent IOL implantation and it was done from September to November 2019, the better terminology will be Prospective, interventional study. Can the authors throw some light over this for the benefit of the readers.Secondly, it is not clear how the patients were allocated in two groups? The first group had 71 patients and the second group had 45 patients. What rationale did the authors use to divide the patients? This needs clarification. Ideally, the patients could have been randomized to two equal groups to avoid bias and compare the IOLs on similar grounds.Thirdly, the exclusion criteria are missing. It would be really interesting to know what all patients were excluded from the study.Lastly, was contrast sensitivity (CS)[3] was taken into account for the two IOL’s? This could have been really interesting to know to compare the two IOL CS under mesopic and photopic conditions catering to patient satisfaction and final outcome.
Authors: E Haaskjold; E D Allen; R L Burton; S K Webber; K U Sandvig; H Jyrkkiö; E Leite; A Liekfeld; B Philipson; A Nyström; J Wollensak Journal: J Cataract Refract Surg Date: 1998-05 Impact factor: 3.351