Multifocal Intraocular Lenses Clinical Assessment. Patient Selection for Multifocal Intraocular Correction

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

There are some multufocal intraocular corrections particular qualities compared to monofocal correction. Therefore, the patient’s careful selection, detail preoperative diagnosis, accurate intraocular lens power calculation are necessary to get the optimal clinical results. There are some disadvantages in the postoperative period, such as the contrast sensitivities reduction, dysphotopsia, neuroadaptation. In addition multifocal IOLs are expensive. The clinical studies include evaluating of visual acuity for different distances, defocus curve, spectacle independence, contrast sensitivity, aberrometry data. Additionally, complications after multifocal IOLs implantation and the reasons of explantation are analyzed. This review includes 36 articles (34 clinical studies and 2 meta-analysis) of the following aspects of multifocal intraocular correction: contrast sensitivity, aberrometry analysis, pupil influence on the visual outcomes, postoperative complications, analysis of explantation reasons, preoperative patient’s selection for multifocal correction.

About the authors

T. A. Morozova

Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

Email: TatianaMorozovaMD@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3320-5366
Moscow Russian Federation

T. Z. Kerimov

A.I. Evdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry

Author for correspondence.
Email: timkerimov2014@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8967-6370
Moscow Russian Federation

References

  1. Montes-Mico R, Espana E, Bueno I, et al. Visual performance with multifocal intraocular lenses - Mesopic contrast sensitivity under distance and near conditions. Ophthalmology. 2004;111(1):85–96. doi: 10.1016/S0161-6420(03)00862-5.
  2. Alio JL, Plaza-Puche AB, Pinero DP, et al. Quality of life evaluation after implantation of 2 multifocal intraocular lens models and a monofocal model. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011;37(4):638–648. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.10.056.
  3. Packer M, Chu YR, Waltz KL, et al. Evaluation of the aspheric tecnis multifocal intraocular lens: one-year results from the first cohort of the food and drug administration clinical trial. Am J Ophthalmol. 2010;149(4):577–584. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2009.10.022.
  4. Sen HN, Sarikkola AU, Uusitalo RJ, Laatikainen L. Quality of vision after AMO array multifocal intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004;30(12):2483–2493. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2004.04.049.
  5. Lubinski W, Podboraczynska-Jodko K, Gronkowska-Serafin J, Karczewicz D. Visual outcome three and six months after implantation of Acri.LISA 366D lenses. Klin Oczna. 2012;114(4):249–254.
  6. Lubiński W, Gronkowska-Serafin J, Podborączyńska-Jodko K. Clinical outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of the Tecnis ZMB00 multifocal intraocular lens. Medical Science Monitor. 2014;20:1220−1226. doi: 10.12659/MSM.890585.
  7. Малюгин Б.Э., Морозова Т.А., Фомина О.В. Исследование в динамике функции контрастной чувствительности пациентов на фоне интраокулярной коррекции афакии мультифокальной линзой с градиентной оптикой // Современные технологии в офтальмологии. ― 2016. ― №5 ― С. 62–64. [Malyugin BE, Morozova TA, Fomina OV. Issledovanie v dinamike funktsii kontrastnoi chuvstvitel’nosti patsientov na fone intraokulyarnoi korrektsii afakii mul’tifokal’noi linzoi s gradientnoi optikoi. Sovremennye tekhnologii v oftal’mologii. 2016;(5):62–64. (In Russ).]
  8. Rosen E, Alio JL, Dick HB, et al. Efficacy and safety of multifocal intraocular lenses following cataract and refractive lens exchange: metaanalysis of peer-reviewed publications. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016;42(2):310–328. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.01.014.
  9. Kim JS, Jung JW, Lee JM, et al. Clinical outcomes following implantation of diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses with varying add powers. Am J Ophthalmol. 2015;160(4):702–709. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2015.07.021.
  10. Vilar C, Hida WT, de Medeiros AL, et al. Comparison between bilateral implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens and blended implantation of two bifocal intraocular lenses. Clin Ophthalmol. 2017;11:1393–1397. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S139909.
  11. Plaza-Puche AB, Alio JL. Analysis of defocus curves of different modern multifocal intraocular lenses. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2016;26(5):412–417. doi: 10.5301/ejo.5000780.
  12. Cochener B. Prospective clinical comparison of patient outcomes following implantation of trifocal or bifocal intraocular lenses. J Refract Surg. 2016;32(3):146–151. doi: 10.3928/1081597x-20160114-01.
  13. Lee H, Lee K, Ahn JM, et al. Evaluation of optical quality parameters and ocular aberrations in multifocal intraocular lens implanted eyes. Yonsei Med J. 2014;55(5):1413–1420. doi: 10.3349/Ymj.2014.55.5.1413.
  14. Montes-Mico R, Lopez-Gil N, Perez-Vives C, et al. In vitro optical performance of nonrotational symmetric and refractive-diffractive aspheric multifocal intraocular lenses: impact of tilt and decentration. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012;38(9):1657–1663. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2012.03.040.
  15. Tchah H, Nam K, Yoo A. Predictive factors for photic phenomena after refractive, rotationally asymmetric, multifocal intraocular lens implantation. Int J Ophthalmol. 2017;10(2):241–245. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2017.02.10.
  16. Akondi V, Perez-Merino P, Martinez-Enriquez E, et al. Evaluation of the true wavefront aberrations in eyes implanted with a rotationally asymmetric multifocal intraocular lens. J Refract Surg. 2017;33(4):257–265. doi: 10.3928/1081597x-20161206-03.
  17. Liu JP, Zhang F, Zhao JY, et al. Visual function and higher order aberration after implantation of aspheric and spherical multifocal intraocular lenses: a meta-analysis. Int J Ophthalmol. 2013;6(5):690–695. doi: 10.3980/j.issn.2222-3959.2013.05.27.
  18. Mastropasqua R, Toto L, Vecchiarino L, et al. Multifocal IOL implant with or without capsular tension ring: study of wavefront error and visual performance. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2013;23(4):510–517. doi: 10.5301/ejo.5000258.
  19. Wang M, Corpuz CC, Fujiwara M, Tomita M. Visual and optical performance of diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses with different haptic designs: 6 month follow-up. Clin Ophthalmol. 2014;8:919–926. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S60493.
  20. Mester U, Sauer T, Kaymak H. Decentration and tilt of a single-piece aspheric intraocular lens compared with the lens position in young phakic eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35(3):485–490. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.09.028.
  21. Морозова Т.А., Покровский Д.Ф., Медведев И.Б., Керимов Т.З. Современные аспекты мультифокальной интраокулярной коррекции (обзор) // Вестник Российской академии медицинских наук. ― 2017. ― Т.72. ― №4 ― С. 268–275. [Morozova TA, Pokrovskiy DF, Medvedev IB, Kerimov TZ. Modern aspects of multifocal intraocular correction: a review. Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences. 2017;72(4):268–275. (In Russ).] doi: 10.15690/vramn835.
  22. Esteve-Taboada JJ, Dominguez-Vicent A, Del Aguila-Carrasco AJ, et al. Effect of large apertures on the optical quality of three multifocal lenses. J Refract Surg. 2015;31(10):666–676. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20150928-01.
  23. Wang M, Corpuz CC, Huseynova T, Tomita M. Pupil influence on the visual outcomes of a new-generation multifocal toric intraocular lens with a surface-embedded near segment. J Refract Surg. 2016;32(2):90–95. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20160105-01.
  24. Garcia-Domene MC, Felipe A, Peris-Martinez C, et al. Image quality comparison of two multifocal IOLs: influence of the pupil. J Refract Surg. 2015;31(4):230–235. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20150319-02.
  25. Venter JA, Pelouskova M, Collins BM, et al. Visual outcomes and patient satisfaction in 9366 eyes using a refractive segmented multifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2013;39(10):1477–1484. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.03.035.
  26. van der Mooren M, Steinert R, Tyson F, et al. Explanted multifocal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015;41(4):873–877. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.02.005.
  27. Kermani O, Gerten G. [Explantation of multifocal intraoular lenses - frequency, causes and course. (In German).] Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd. 2016;233(8):928–932. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-104065.
  28. Морозова Т.А. Интраокулярная коррекция афакии мультифокальной линзой с градиентной оптикой. Клинико-теоретическое исследование: Автореф... дис. канд. мед. наук. — М.; 2006. — 26 с. [Morozova TA. Intraokulyarnaya korrektsiya afakii mul’tifokal’noi linzoi s gradientnoi optikoi. Kliniko-teoreticheskoe issledovanie. [dissertation abstract] Moscow; 2006. 26 p. (In Russ).]
  29. Moshirfar M, Hoggan RN, Muthappan V. Angle kappa and its importance in refractive surgery. Oman J Ophthalmol. 2013;6(3):151–158. doi: 10.4103/0974-620X.122268.
  30. Prakash G, Prakash DR, Agarwal A, et al. Predictive factor and kappa angle analysis for visual satisfactions in patients with multifocal IOL implantation. Eye (Lond). 2011;25(9):1187–1193. doi: 10.1038/eye.2011.150.
  31. Berdahl JP, Waring GO. Match right lens to patient needs: 10 objective measurements can improve multifocal IOL implantation outcomes. Ophthalmology Times [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2017 Dec 12]:28–29. Available from: http://digital.healthcaregroup.advanstar.com.
  32. Klyce SD, McDonald MB, Morales MU. Screening patients with cataract for premium iol candidacy using microperimetry. J Refract Surg. 2015;31(10):690–696. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20150928-02.
  33. Klein BR, Brown EN, Casden RS. Preoperative macular spectral-domain optical coherence tomography in patients considering advanced-technology intraocular lenses for cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016;42(4):537–541. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.01.036.
  34. Braga-Mele R, Chang D, Dewey S, et al. Multifocal intraocular lenses: relative indications and contraindications for implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014;40(2):313–322. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.12.011.
  35. Морозова Т.А., Керимов Т.З. Современные подходы к анализу дисфотопсий, оценка субъективной удовлетворенности и очковой независимости на фоне мультифокальной интраокулярной коррекции. Обзор // Вестник Российской академии медицинских наук. ― 2017. ― Т.72. ― №5 ― С. 355–364. [Morozova TA, Kerimov TZ. Modern approaches to dysphotopsia analysis, assessment of patient satisfaction and spectacle independence after multifocal intraocular correction: review. Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences. 2017;72(5):355–364. (In Russ).] doi: 10.15690/vramn883.
  36. Hashemi H, Khabazkhoob M, Yazdani K, et al. Distribution of angle kappa measurements with Orbscan II in a population-based survey. J Refract Surg. 2010;26(12):966–971. doi: 10.3928/1081597x-20100114-06.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2018 "Paediatrician" Publishers LLC



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies