The Clinical Depth of Field Achievable with Trifocal and Monofocal Intraocular Lenses: Theoretical Considerations and Proof of Concept Clinical Results

Overview

Journal Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

Specialty Ophthalmology

Date 2016 Dec 26

PMID 28013392

Citations 4

Authors

Ante Barisic

Sudi Patel

Nikica Gabric

Claes G Feinbaum

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: To estimate the depth of field (DOF) achievable with multi-and monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and compare with actual measurements of DOF in cases implanted with a trifocal IOL and biconvex monofocal IOL METHODS: I) Computer simulations were produced to describe the relationship between DOF, pupil size, preoperative ametropia, and retinal blur tolerance limit for a model eye implanted with either multi- or monofocal IOLs. II) Monocular DOF and pupil size were measured under distance viewing conditions between 3 and 6 months postoperative following uneventful cataract surgery. Cases were implanted with either i) trifocal aspheric IOL (n = 36), or ii) biconvex aspheric monofocal IOL (n = 26). DOF was also measured at 0.33 m in cases implanted with i).

Results: Simulations revealed significant associations between DOF, pupil size, and retinal blur tolerance limit. The mean (±SD) DOF & pupil sizes were at distance for i) above 2.59D (0.68) & 3.54 mm (0.377), and for ii) above 1.67D (0.51) & 2.90 mm (0.351), and for i) above 3.16D (0.46) at near. The difference between groups were significant for DOF and pupil size at distance (p < 0.001). DOF was significantly greater at near compared with distance in i) above (p < 0.001). For a pupil size of 3 mm, the simulations produce similar DOF values when the tolerance limit of retinal blur is 10 μ.

Conclusions: The DOF was significantly better after implanting the trifocal IOL compared with the monofocal IOL, and DOF is increased under near viewing conditions. The clinical results are similar to calculated DOF values when the tolerance limit of retinal blur is 10 μ.

Citing Articles

Clinical Performance of Extended Depth of Focus (EDOF) Intraocular Lenses - A Retrospective Comparative Study of Mini Well Ready and Symfony.

Nowik K, Nowik K, Kanclerz P, Szaflik J Clin Ophthalmol. 2022; 16:1613-1621.

PMID: 35651536 PMC: 9150758. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S341698.

Depth of field and visual performance after implantation of a new hydrophobic trifocal intraocular lens.

Palomino-Bautista C, Cervino A, Cuina-Sardina R, Carmona-Gonzalez D, Castillo-Gomez A, Sanchez-Jean R BMC Ophthalmol. 2022; 22(1):240.

PMID: 35642049 PMC: 9153098. DOI: 10.1186/s12886-022-02462-3.

Depth of field measures in pseudophakic eyes implanted with different type of presbyopia-correcting IOLS.

Palomino-Bautista C, Sanchez-Jean R, Carmona-Gonzalez D, Pinero D, Molina-Martin A Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):12081.

PMID: 34103624 PMC: 8187633. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-91654-w.

Subjective and objective depth of field measures in pseudophakic eyes: comparison between extended depth of focus, trifocal and bifocal intraocular lenses.

Palomino-Bautista C, Sanchez-Jean R, Carmona-Gonzalez D, Pinero D, Molina-Martin A Int Ophthalmol. 2019; 40(2):351-359.

PMID: 31583551 DOI: 10.1007/s10792-019-01186-6.

References

Knorz M, Claessens D, SCHAEFER R, Seiberth V, Liesenhoff H . Evaluation of contrast acuity and defocus curve in bifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1993; 19(4):513-23. DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(13)80616-5. View

Gupta N, Naroo S, Wolffsohn J . Is randomisation necessary for measuring defocus curves in pre-presbyopes?. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2007; 30(2):119-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.clae.2007.02.005. View

Post Jr C . Comparison of depth of focus and low-contrast acuities for monofocal versus multifocal intraocular lens patients at 1 year. Ophthalmology. 1992; 99(11):1658-63; discussion 1663-4. DOI: 10.1016/s0161-6420(92)31735-x. View

Benard Y, Lopez-Gil N, Legras R . Optimizing the subjective depth-of-focus with combinations of fourth- and sixth-order spherical aberration. Vision Res. 2011; 51(23-24):2471-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2011.10.003. View

Kamlesh , Dadeya S, Kaushik S . Contrast sensitivity and depth of focus with aspheric multifocal versus conventional monofocal intraocular lens. Can J Ophthalmol. 2001; 36(4):197-201. DOI: 10.1016/s0008-4182(01)80040-5. View

Nakazawa M, Ohtsuki K . Apparent accommodation in pseudophakic eyes after implantation of posterior chamber intraocular lenses. Am J Ophthalmol. 1983; 96(4):435-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9394(14)77905-x. View

Yi F, Iskander D, Collins M . Estimation of the depth of focus from wavefront measurements. J Vis. 2010; 10(4):3.1-9. DOI: 10.1167/10.4.3. View

Wolffsohn J, Jinabhai A, Kingsnorth A, Sheppard A, Naroo S, Shah S . Exploring the optimum step size for defocus curves. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2013; 39(6):873-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.01.031. View

Percival S, Yousef K . Treatment of uniocular aphakia. A comparison of iris clip lenses with hard corneal contact lenses. Br J Ophthalmol. 1976; 60(9):642-4. PMC: 1042784. DOI: 10.1136/bjo.60.9.642. View

10.

Tucker J, Charman W . The depth-of-focus of the human eye for Snellen letters. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1975; 52(1):3-21. DOI: 10.1097/00006324-197501000-00002. View

11.

Hardman Lea S, Rubinstein M, Snead M, Haworth S . Pseudophakic accommodation? A study of the stability of capsular bag supported, one piece, rigid tripod, or soft flexible implants. Br J Ophthalmol. 1990; 74(1):22-5. PMC: 1041972. DOI: 10.1136/bjo.74.1.22. View

12.

Cillino S, Casuccio A, Di Pace F, Morreale R, Pillitteri F, Cillino G . One-year outcomes with new-generation multifocal intraocular lenses. Ophthalmology. 2008; 115(9):1508-16. DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.04.017. View

13.

Tucker J, Rabie E . Depth-of-focus of the pseudophakic eye. Br J Physiol Opt. 1980; 34:12-21. View

14.

VON BAHR G . Studies on the depth of focus of the eye. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1952; 30(1):39-44. View

15.

Benard Y, Lopez-Gil N, Legras R . Subjective depth of field in presence of 4th-order and 6th-order Zernike spherical aberration using adaptive optics technology. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010; 36(12):2129-38. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.07.022. View

16.

Patel S, Marshall J, Fitzke 3rd F . Model for predicting the optical performance of the eye in refractive surgery. Refract Corneal Surg. 1993; 9(5):366-75. View

17.

Sergienko N, Kondratenko Y, Tutchenko N . Depth of focus in pseudophakic eyes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2008; 246(11):1623-7. DOI: 10.1007/s00417-008-0923-3. View

18.

Macsai M, Padnick-Silver L, Fontes B . Visual outcomes after accommodating intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006; 32(4):628-33. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2006.01.027. View

19.

Yao P, Lin H, Huang J, Chu R, Jiang B . Objective depth-of-focus is different from subjective depth-of-focus and correlated with accommodative microfluctuations. Vision Res. 2010; 50(13):1266-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2010.04.011. View

20.

Wang B, Ciuffreda K . Depth-of-focus of the human eye: theory and clinical implications. Surv Ophthalmol. 2006; 51(1):75-85. DOI: 10.1016/j.survophthal.2005.11.003. View