Extended Depth of Focus IOL Implantation in Patients with Previously Monofocal IOL Implantation in Contralateral Eye

Purpose: to analysis the results of combined implantation of non-diffractive IOL with extended depth of focus and injector preloaded monofocal IOL.Patients and methods. 82 patients (164 eyes) after bilateral or combined implantation of AcrySof IQ Vivity (n = 72) and Clareon (n = 92) IOLs (Alcon, USA...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: К. B. Pershin, N. F. Pashinova, A. Iu. Tsygankov, E. A. Antonov, I. V. Kosova, L. V. Batalina
Format: Article
Language:Russian
Published: Ophthalmology Publishing Group 2024-10-01
Series:Oftalʹmologiâ
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.ophthalmojournal.com/opht/article/view/2419
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1839571019003592704
author К. B. Pershin
N. F. Pashinova
A. Iu. Tsygankov
E. A. Antonov
I. V. Kosova
L. V. Batalina
author_facet К. B. Pershin
N. F. Pashinova
A. Iu. Tsygankov
E. A. Antonov
I. V. Kosova
L. V. Batalina
author_sort К. B. Pershin
collection DOAJ
description Purpose: to analysis the results of combined implantation of non-diffractive IOL with extended depth of focus and injector preloaded monofocal IOL.Patients and methods. 82 patients (164 eyes) after bilateral or combined implantation of AcrySof IQ Vivity (n = 72) and Clareon (n = 92) IOLs (Alcon, USA) with a mean follow-up of 6.2 ± 1.9 (6–8) months were included. 20 patients (40 eyes) with bilateral AcrySof IQ Vivity implantation formed group I, and 32 patients (64 eyes) with Clareon IOL implantation (n = 32) followed by Acrysof IQ Vivity implantation in the second (n = 32) formed group II. The comparison group (III) included 30 patients (60 eyes) with bilateral Clareon implantation. In group I, emmetropia was planned in the leading eye and myopia of 0.5–0.75 D in the nonleading eye; in groups II and III, emmetropia was planned in both eyes.Results. There was an increase in UCNVA from 0.29 ± 0.08 to 0.62 ± 0.14 in group I and from 0.22 ± 0.04 to 0.59 ± 0.11 in group II, UCIVA from 0.21 ± 0.08 in group I to 0.84 ± 0.18 in   group II, UCDVA from 0.27 ± 0.09 to 0.92 ± 0.21 in group I and from 0.34 ± 0.10 to 0.89 ± 0.18 in group II during a maximum follow-up period of 6 months. There was an increase in BCNVA from 0.58 ± 0.04 to 0.68 ± 0.07 in group I and from 0.43 ± 0.04 to 0.64 ± 0.05 in group II, BCIVA from 0.55 ± 0.10 to 0, 91 ± 0.24 in group I and from 0.27 ± 0.04 to 0.7 ± 0.15 in group II, BCDVA — from 0.61 ± 0.12 to 1.0 ± 0.31 in group I and from 0.42 ± 0.09 to 0.9 ± 0.25 in group II. The differences between groups were not statistically significant (p > 0.1). In group III the values of UCDVA and UCIVA were significantly lower than in groups I and II (p < 0.05). Group I showed a decrease in spherical refractive equivalent from –2.50 ± 1.2 to –0.15 ± 0.59 in the follow-up period of 6 months, in group II — from –3.0 ± 1.2 to –0.25 ± 0.48, in group III from –1.75 ± 1.1 to –0.25 ± 0.41 (p > 0.1). When comparing the frequency of adverse optical phenomena between the groups, no significant differences were found (p > 0.1).Conclusion. For the first time in Russia, a comparative analysis of the results of EDOF and monofocal IOL implantation compared to bilateral EDOF IOL and monofocal IOL implantation in patients with presbyopia was performed. The absence of significant differences between the groups allows to justify the implantation of non-diffractive EDOF IOLs in paired eyes in patients with previously implanted monofocal IOLs who wish to reduce dependence on spectacle correction at intermediate and near distances.
format Article
id doaj-art-309735c5a9b64a0abd06a2d776b30e92
institution Matheson Library
issn 1816-5095
2500-0845
language Russian
publishDate 2024-10-01
publisher Ophthalmology Publishing Group
record_format Article
series Oftalʹmologiâ
spelling doaj-art-309735c5a9b64a0abd06a2d776b30e922025-08-04T14:32:26ZrusOphthalmology Publishing GroupOftalʹmologiâ1816-50952500-08452024-10-0121346447010.18008/1816-5095-2024-3-464-4701164Extended Depth of Focus IOL Implantation in Patients with Previously Monofocal IOL Implantation in Contralateral EyeК. B. Pershin0N. F. Pashinova1A. Iu. Tsygankov2E. A. Antonov3I. V. Kosova4L. V. Batalina5“Eximer” Eye Center; Academy of Postgraduate Education of The Federal Medical-Biological Agency Volokolamskoe“Eximer” Eye Center; Academy of Postgraduate Education of The Federal Medical-Biological Agency Volokolamskoe“Eximer” Eye Center“Eximer” Eye Center“Eximer” Eye Center“Eximer” Eye CenterPurpose: to analysis the results of combined implantation of non-diffractive IOL with extended depth of focus and injector preloaded monofocal IOL.Patients and methods. 82 patients (164 eyes) after bilateral or combined implantation of AcrySof IQ Vivity (n = 72) and Clareon (n = 92) IOLs (Alcon, USA) with a mean follow-up of 6.2 ± 1.9 (6–8) months were included. 20 patients (40 eyes) with bilateral AcrySof IQ Vivity implantation formed group I, and 32 patients (64 eyes) with Clareon IOL implantation (n = 32) followed by Acrysof IQ Vivity implantation in the second (n = 32) formed group II. The comparison group (III) included 30 patients (60 eyes) with bilateral Clareon implantation. In group I, emmetropia was planned in the leading eye and myopia of 0.5–0.75 D in the nonleading eye; in groups II and III, emmetropia was planned in both eyes.Results. There was an increase in UCNVA from 0.29 ± 0.08 to 0.62 ± 0.14 in group I and from 0.22 ± 0.04 to 0.59 ± 0.11 in group II, UCIVA from 0.21 ± 0.08 in group I to 0.84 ± 0.18 in   group II, UCDVA from 0.27 ± 0.09 to 0.92 ± 0.21 in group I and from 0.34 ± 0.10 to 0.89 ± 0.18 in group II during a maximum follow-up period of 6 months. There was an increase in BCNVA from 0.58 ± 0.04 to 0.68 ± 0.07 in group I and from 0.43 ± 0.04 to 0.64 ± 0.05 in group II, BCIVA from 0.55 ± 0.10 to 0, 91 ± 0.24 in group I and from 0.27 ± 0.04 to 0.7 ± 0.15 in group II, BCDVA — from 0.61 ± 0.12 to 1.0 ± 0.31 in group I and from 0.42 ± 0.09 to 0.9 ± 0.25 in group II. The differences between groups were not statistically significant (p > 0.1). In group III the values of UCDVA and UCIVA were significantly lower than in groups I and II (p < 0.05). Group I showed a decrease in spherical refractive equivalent from –2.50 ± 1.2 to –0.15 ± 0.59 in the follow-up period of 6 months, in group II — from –3.0 ± 1.2 to –0.25 ± 0.48, in group III from –1.75 ± 1.1 to –0.25 ± 0.41 (p > 0.1). When comparing the frequency of adverse optical phenomena between the groups, no significant differences were found (p > 0.1).Conclusion. For the first time in Russia, a comparative analysis of the results of EDOF and monofocal IOL implantation compared to bilateral EDOF IOL and monofocal IOL implantation in patients with presbyopia was performed. The absence of significant differences between the groups allows to justify the implantation of non-diffractive EDOF IOLs in paired eyes in patients with previously implanted monofocal IOLs who wish to reduce dependence on spectacle correction at intermediate and near distances.https://www.ophthalmojournal.com/opht/article/view/2419combined implantationmonofocal ioliol with extended depth of focusedofvivityclareon
spellingShingle К. B. Pershin
N. F. Pashinova
A. Iu. Tsygankov
E. A. Antonov
I. V. Kosova
L. V. Batalina
Extended Depth of Focus IOL Implantation in Patients with Previously Monofocal IOL Implantation in Contralateral Eye
Oftalʹmologiâ
combined implantation
monofocal iol
iol with extended depth of focus
edof
vivity
clareon
title Extended Depth of Focus IOL Implantation in Patients with Previously Monofocal IOL Implantation in Contralateral Eye
title_full Extended Depth of Focus IOL Implantation in Patients with Previously Monofocal IOL Implantation in Contralateral Eye
title_fullStr Extended Depth of Focus IOL Implantation in Patients with Previously Monofocal IOL Implantation in Contralateral Eye
title_full_unstemmed Extended Depth of Focus IOL Implantation in Patients with Previously Monofocal IOL Implantation in Contralateral Eye
title_short Extended Depth of Focus IOL Implantation in Patients with Previously Monofocal IOL Implantation in Contralateral Eye
title_sort extended depth of focus iol implantation in patients with previously monofocal iol implantation in contralateral eye
topic combined implantation
monofocal iol
iol with extended depth of focus
edof
vivity
clareon
url https://www.ophthalmojournal.com/opht/article/view/2419
work_keys_str_mv AT kbpershin extendeddepthoffocusiolimplantationinpatientswithpreviouslymonofocaliolimplantationincontralateraleye
AT nfpashinova extendeddepthoffocusiolimplantationinpatientswithpreviouslymonofocaliolimplantationincontralateraleye
AT aiutsygankov extendeddepthoffocusiolimplantationinpatientswithpreviouslymonofocaliolimplantationincontralateraleye
AT eaantonov extendeddepthoffocusiolimplantationinpatientswithpreviouslymonofocaliolimplantationincontralateraleye
AT ivkosova extendeddepthoffocusiolimplantationinpatientswithpreviouslymonofocaliolimplantationincontralateraleye
AT lvbatalina extendeddepthoffocusiolimplantationinpatientswithpreviouslymonofocaliolimplantationincontralateraleye