Abstract
Purpose
To compare the optical quality between two intraocular lenses (IOLs): the Mini WELL Ready progressive multifocal (SIFI Medtech, Catania, Italy), and the TECNIS Symfony (Abbott Laboratories, Illinois, USA), which both provide a continuous range of vision from far to near positions.
Methods
The in vitro optical quality of each lens was assessed with an instrument conceived for measuring the modulation transfer function (MTF). The optical quality of each lens was described in terms of MTF, through-focus MTF, defocus tolerance, pupil dependence, and Strehl ratio MTF. These metrics were assessed for the best lens far focus, and at four vergences (from −1.5 to −3.0 D in 0.5-D steps), at 3.0 and 4.5 mm apertures.
Results
The through-focus curves of each lens showed two main areas: one corresponding to far-distance vision, and another to intermediate- and near-distance vision. Both lenses showed similar MTF curves and Strehl ratio values at both apertures. The optical quality of both lenses slightly decreased with the aperture for all vergences. Nevertheless, the quality of the progressive multifocal lens increased with the aperture at far-distance vision. This lens also showed the largest defocus tolerance at near-distance vision for both apertures.
Conclusions
The results obtained in the present study suggest that both designs might enlarge the depth of focus. Whereas, the Mini WELL Ready showed better optical quality than the TECNIS Symfony at far vision with 4.5 mm aperture, and larger defocus tolerance than the diffractive lens at near-distance vision.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Atkinson MJ, Tally S, Heichel CW, Kozak I, Leich J, Levack A (2013) A qualitative investigation of visual tasks with which to assess distance-specific visual function. Qual Life Res 22:437–453
Luo BP, Brown GC, Luo SC, Brown MM (2008) The quality of life associated with presbyopia. Am J Ophthalmol 145(4):618–622. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2007.12.011
Maxwell WA, Cionni RJ, Lehmann RP, Modi SS (2009) Functional outcomes after bilateral implantation of apodized diffractive aspheric acrylic intraocular lenses with a +3.0 or +4.0 diopter addition power randomized multicenter clinical study. J Cataract Refract Surg 35(12):2054–2061. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.06.041
Munoz G, Albarran-Diego C, Ferrer-Blasco T, Sakla HF, Garcia-Lazaro S (2011) Visual function after bilateral implantation of a new zonal refractive aspheric multifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 37(11):2043–2052. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.05.045
Madrid-Costa D, Ruiz-Alcocer J, Ferrer-Blasco T, Garcia-Lazaro S, Montes-Mico R (2013) Optical quality differences between three multifocal intraocular lenses: bifocal low add, bifocal moderate add, and trifocal. J Refract Surg 29(11):749–754. doi:10.3928/1081597X-20131021-04
Gatinel D, Houbrechts Y (2013) Comparison of bifocal and trifocal diffractive and refractive intraocular lenses using an optical bench. J Cataract Refract Surg 39(7):1093–1099. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.01.048
Carson D, Hill W, Hong X, Karakelle M (2014) Optical bench performance of AcrySof(®) IQ ReSTOR(®), AT LISA(®) tri, and FineVision(®) intraocular lenses. Clin Ophthalmol 8:2105–2113
Alfonso JF, Fernandez-Vega L, Amhaz H, Montes-Mico R, Valcarcel B, Ferrer-Blasco T (2009) Visual function after implantation of an aspheric bifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 35(5):885–892. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.01.014
Alfonso JF, Fernandez-Vega L, Puchades C, Montes-Mico R (2010) Intermediate visual function with different multifocal intraocular lens models. J Cataract Refract Surg 36(5):733–739. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2009.11.018
Santhiago MR, Wilson SE, Netto MV, Ghanen RC, Monteiro ML, Bechara SJ, Espana EM, Mello GR, Kara N Jr (2012) Modulation transfer function and optical quality after bilateral implantation of a +3.00 D versus a +4.00 D multifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 38(2):215–220. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.08.029
Pedrotti E, Mastropasqua R, Passilongo M, Parisi G, Marchesoni I, Marchini G (2014) Comparison of two multifocal intraocular lens designs that differ only in near add. J Refract Surg 30:754–760
International Organization for Standardization (2014) Part 2: optical propierties and test methods. In: ISO 11979: Ophthalmic impants – Intraocular lenses – Geneva, Switzerland, pp 1–30
Norrby N (1995) Standardized methods for assessing the imaging quality of intraocular lenses. Appl Opt 34:7327–7333
Thibos L, Hong X, Bradley A, Applegate RA (2004) Accuracy and precision of objective refraction from wavefront aberrations. J Vis 4:329–351
Artigas JM, Menezo JL, Peris C, Felipe A, Diaz-Llopis M (2007) Image quality with multifocal intraocular lenses and the effect of pupil size: comparison of refractive and hybrid refractive-diffractive designs. J Cataract Refract Surg 33(12):2111–2117. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.07.035
International Organization for Standardization (2006) Part 9: multifocal intraocular lenses. In: ISO 11979: Ophthalmic impants – Intraocular lenses – Geneva, Switzerland, pp 1–20
Felipe A, Pastor F, Artigas J, Diez-Ajenjo A, Gené A, Menezo J (2010) Correlation between optics quality of multifocal intraocular lenses and visual acuity. Tolerance to modulation transfer function decay. J Cataract Refract Surg 36:557–562
Koch DD, Samuelson SW, Haft EA, Merin LM (1991) Pupillary size and responsiveness. Implications for selection of a Bifocal intraocular lens. Ophthalmology 98:1030–1035
Venter J, Pelouskova M, Collins B, Schallhorn S, Hannan S (2013) Visual outcomes and patient satisfaction in 9366 eyes using a refractive segmented multifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 39:1477–1484
Venter J, Pelouskova M, Bull C, Schallhorn S, Hannan S (2015) Visual outcomes and patient satisfaction with a rotational asymmetric refractive intraocular lens for emmetropic presbyopia. J Cataract Refract Surg 41:585–593
Rosa A, Silva M, Lobo C, Mira J, Farinha C, voa Po J, Castelo-Branco M, Murta J (2013) Comparison of visual function after bilateral implantation of inferior sector-shaped near-addition and diffractive–refractive multifocal IOLs. J Cataract Refract Surg 39:1653–1659
Rabsilber TM, Rudalevicius P, Jasinskas V, Holzer M, Auffarth GU (2013) Influence of +3.00 D and +4.00 D near addition on functional outcomes of a refractive multifocal intraocular lens model. J Cataract Refract Surg 39:350–357
Venter J, Barclay D, Pelouskova M, Bull C (2014) Initial Experience With a New Refractive Rotationally Asymmetric Multifocal Intraocular Lens. J Refract Surg 30:770–776
Montés-Micó R, López-Gil N, Pérez-Vives C, Bonaque S, Ferrer-Blasco T (2012) In vitro optical performance of nonrotational symmetric and refractive-diffractive aspheric multifocal intraocular lenses: impact of tilt and decentration. J Cataract Refract Surg 38(9):1657–1663. doi:10.1016/j.jcrs.2012.03.040
Montés-Micó R, Ferrer-Blasco T, Cerviño A (2009) Analysis of the possible benefits of aspheric intraocular lenses: Review of the literature. J Cataract Refract Surg 35:172–181
Pieh S, Fiala W, Malz A, Stork W (2009) In vitro Strehl ratios with spherical, aberration-free, average, and customized spherical aberration-correcting intraocular lenses. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 50:1264–1270
Eppig T, Scholz K, Loffler A, Meßner A, Langenbucher A (2009) Effect of decentration and tilt on the image quality of aspheric intraocular lens designs in a model eye. J Cataract Refract Surg 35:1091–1100
Acknowledgments
This research was supported in part by a “Grups d’Investigació Emergents” grant funded by the Generalitat Valenciana (GV/2015/046) to Dr. Ferrer-Blasco, and by an “Atracció de talent” research scholarship (Universidad de Valencia) awarded to Alberto Domínguez-Vicent (UV-INV-PREDOC13-110412) and Antonio J. Del Águila-Carrasco (UV-INV-PREDOC14-179135).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
All authors certify that they have only non-financial interests (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Domínguez-Vicent, A., Esteve-Taboada, J.J., Del Águila-Carrasco, A.J. et al. In vitro optical quality comparison between the Mini WELL Ready progressive multifocal and the TECNIS Symfony. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 254, 1387–1397 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-3240-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-3240-7