Abstract
Objectives
To compare the dynamic visual acuity (DVA) following implantation of trifocal with monofocal intraocular lenses (IOL) and using a novel test system.
Methods
The present research was a retrospective, multicenter clinical study. Two hundred and ten eyes of 149 patients that underwent cataract phacoemulsification and IOL implantation were enrolled. One hundred and ten eyes of patients received trifocal (AT LISA tri839MP, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Germany) and 100 eyes received monofocal (Tecnis ZCB00, Abbott, United States) lenses and were evaluated 3 months after implantation. Outcome measures included monocular uncorrected distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA) and near (UNVA) visual acuity and best corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA; logMAR units); contrast sensitivity under photopic, mesopic, with glare conditions; and dynamic visual acuity using a self-developed system.
Results
There was no statistically significant difference in baseline characteristics between groups. Monocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA were significantly better (all p < 0.001) in the trifocal IOL group, but not BCDVA. The trifocal IOL group showed better contrast sensitivity under photopic, mesopic, with or without glare conditions (p < 0.05) and statistically significantly better dynamic vision at 15, 30, 60, and 90 degrees per second (dps) compared with the monofocal group (all p < 0.001). The strength of positive association only between UIVA and dynamic visual acuity increased as the velocity increased, but not UDVA or UNVA.
Conclusions
Diffractive trifocal IOL provides better postoperative full range vision acuity, contrast sensitivity, and dynamic vision compared with monofocal IOLs. And intermediate visual acuity is increasingly associated with DVA as the velocity increasing.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
Data availability
The raw data required to reproduce these findings are available upon requirements.
References
Lee CM, Afshari NA. The global state of cataract blindness. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2017;28:98–103.
Wang SY, Stem MS, Oren G, Shtein R, Lichter PR. Patient-centered and visual quality outcomes of premium cataract surgery: a systematic review. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2017;27:387–401.
Perez-Vives C. Biomaterial influence on intraocular lens performance: an overview. J Ophthalmol. 2018;2018:2687385.
Geer I, Robertson KM. Measurement of central and peripheral dynamic visual acuity thresholds during ocular pursuit of a moving target. Optom Vis Sci. 1993;70:552–60.
Hendry SH, Calkins DJ. Neuronal chemistry and functional organization in the primate visual system. Trends Neurosci. 1998;21:344–9.
Ishigaki H, Miyao M. Implications for dynamic visual acuity with changes in aged and sex. Percept Mot skills. 1994;78:363–9.
Patel I, Turano KA, Broman AT, Bandeen-Roche K, Munoz B, West SK. Measures of visual function and percentage of preferred walking speed in older adults: the salisbury eye evaluation project. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47:65–71.
Ao M, Li X, Huang C, Hou Z, Qiu W, Wang W. Significant improvement in dynamic visual acuity after cataract surgery: a promising potential parameter for functional vision. PloS ONE. 2014;9:e115812.
de Silva SR, Evans JR, Kirthi V, Ziaei M, Leyland M. Multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses after cataract extraction. Cochrane database Syst Rev. 2016;12:Cd003169.
Leyland M, Zinicola E. Multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses in cataract surgery: a systematic review. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:1789–98.
Mojzis P, Majerova K, Hrckova L, Pinero DP. Implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens: one-year follow-up. J cataract refractive Surg. 2015;41:1623–30.
Gatinel D, Pagnoulle C, Houbrechts Y, Gobin L. Design and qualification of a diffractive trifocal optical profile for intraocular lenses. J cataract refract Surg. 2011;37:2060–7.
Alfonso JF, Fernandez-Vega Cueto L, Belda-Salmeron L, Montes-Mico R, Fernandez-Vega L. Visual function after implantation of a diffractive aspheric trifocal intraocular lens. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2016;26:405–11.
Kretz FTA, Breyer D, Diakonis VF, Klabe K, Henke F, Auffarth GU et al. Clinical outcomes after binocular implantation of a new trifocal diffractive intraocular lens. J Ophthalmol. 2015;2015:962891.
Mendicute J, Kapp A, Lévy P, Krommes G, Arias-Puente A, Tomalla M et al. Evaluation of visual outcomes and patient satisfaction after implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens. J cataract refract Surg. 2016;42:203–10.
Alio JL, Kaymak H, Breyer D, Cochener B, Plaza-Puche AB. Quality of life related variables measured for three multifocal diffractive intraocular lenses: a prospective randomised clinical trial. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2018; 46:380–8
Mojzis P, Kukuckova L, Majerova K, Ziak P, Pinero DP. Postoperative visual performance with a bifocal and trifocal diffractive intraocular lens during a 1-year follow-up. Int J Ophthalmol. 2017;10:1528–33.
Plaza-Puche AB, Alio JL, Sala E, Mojzis P. Impact of low mesopic contrast sensitivity outcomes in different types of modern multifocal intraocular lenses. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2016;26:612–7.
Cao K, Friedman DS, Jin S, Yusufu M, Zhang J, Wang J et al. Multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses for age-related cataract patients: a system review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials. Surv Ophthalmol. 2019;64:647–58
Schmitz S, Dick HB, Krummenauer F, Schwenn O, Krist R. Contrast sensitivity and glare disability by halogen light after monofocal and multifocal lens implantation. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000;84:1109–12.
Gil MA, Varon C, Cardona G, Vega F, Buil JA. Comparison of far and near contrast sensitivity in patients symmetrically implanted with multifocal and monofocal IOLs. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2014;24:44–52.
Hirano M, Hutchings N, Simpson T, Dalton K. Validity and repeatability of a novel dynamic visual acuity system. Optom Vis Sci. 2017;94:616–25.
Chang ST, Liu YH, Lee JS, See LC. Comparing sports vision among three groups of soft tennis adolescent athletes: normal vision, refractive errors with and without correction. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2015;63:716–21.
Vital D, Hegemann SC, Straumann D, Bergamin O, Bockisch CJ, Angehrn D et al. A new dynamic visual acuity test to assess peripheral vestibular function. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;136:686–91.
Al-Awar Smither J, Kennedy RS. A portable device for the assessment of dynamic visual acuity. Appl ergonomics. 2010;41:266–73.
Ramat S, Colnaghi S, Boehler A, Astore S, Falco P, Mandala M et al. A device for the functional evaluation of the VOR in clinical settings. Front Neurol. 2012;3:39.
Hoffman LG, Rouse M, Ryan JB. Dynamic visual acuity: a review. J Am Optometric Assoc. 1981;52:883–7.
Weissman S, Freeburne CM. Relationship between static and dynamic visual activity. J Exp Psychol. 1965;70:141–6.
Fergenson PE, Suzansky JW. An investigation of dynamic and static visual acuity. Perception. 1973;2:343–56.
Hirsch J, Curcio CA. The spatial resolution capacity of human foveal retina. Vis Res. 1989;29:1095–101.
Demer JL, Crane BT, Tian JR, Wiest G. New tests of vestibular function. Ann N.Y. Acad Sci. 2001;942:428–45.
Hasegawa T, Yamashita M, Suzuki T, Hisa Y, Wada Y. Active linear head motion improves dynamic visual acuity in pursuing a high-speed moving object. Exp brain Res. 2009;194:505–16.
Palidis DJ, Wyder-Hodge PA, Fooken J, Spering M. Distinct eye movement patterns enhance dynamic visual acuity. PloS ONE. 2017;12:e0172061.
Uchida Y, Kudoh D, Murakami A, Honda M, Kitazawa S. Origins of superior dynamic visual acuity in baseball players: superior eye movements or superior image processing. PloS ONE. 2012;7:e31530.
de Brouwer S, Yuksel D, Blohm G, Missal M, Lefevre P. What triggers catch-up saccades during visual tracking? J Neurophysiol. 2002;87:1646–50.
Watson TL, Krekelberg B. The relationship between saccadic suppression and perceptual stability. Curr Biol: CB. 2009;19:1040–3.
Liu X, Xie L, Huang Y. Comparison of the visual performance after implantation of bifocal and trifocal intraocular lenses having an identical platform. J refract Surg. 2018;34:273–80.
Plaza-Puche AB, Alio JL. Analysis of defocus curves of different modern multifocal intraocular lenses. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2016;26:412–7.
Hoshina K, Tagami Y, Mimura O, Edagawa H, Matsubara M, Nakayama T. A study of static, kinetic, and dynamic visual acuity in 102 Japanese professional baseball players. Clin Ophthalmol. 2013;7:627–32.
Funding
This work was supported by a grant from Chinese Capital’s Funds for Health Improvement and Research (Grant number: CFH2018-2-4093).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ren, X., Wang, Y., Wang, D. et al. A novel standardized test system to evaluate dynamic visual acuity post trifocal or monofocal intraocular lens implantation: a multicenter study. Eye 34, 2235–2241 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-020-0780-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-020-0780-9
This article is cited by
-
Comparison of dynamic defocus curve on cataract patients implanting extended depth of focus and monofocal intraocular lens
Eye and Vision (2023)
-
Developing dynamic defocus curve for evaluating dynamic vision accommodative function
BMC Ophthalmology (2022)
-
Comparisons of visual outcomes between bilateral implantation and mix-and-match implantation of three types intraocular lenses
International Ophthalmology (2022)
-
The Evaluation of a New IOL with Extended Depth of Focus to Increase Visual Acuity for Intermediate Distance
SN Comprehensive Clinical Medicine (2021)
