Table 1 Summary of lenses reviewed.

From: Implantable vision-enhancing devices and postoperative rehabilitation in advanced age-related macular degeneration

Device

Source

Technology type

Magnification

Lens status

Incision size (mm)

Monocular/ binocular

Rehab required

PRL selection required

Number of patients enrolled

Mean age

Gender

Race

Baseline BCDVA (logMAR) mean

BCDVA improvement (logMAR) mean

Baseline BCNVA (logMAR) mean

BCNVA improvement (logMAR) mean

Endothelial cell loss

Effect on QoL

VA test method

IMT

[19, 29]

Galilean Telescope

×2.2 and ×2.7

Phakic

10-11

Monocular

Yes

No

217

75.6

103 (47.5%) female

114 (52.5%) male

208 (95.9%) white

3 (1.4%) black

5 (2.3%) Hispanic

1 (0.5%) Asian

1.20

−0.35 (p < 0.0001)a

1.10

−0.32 (p < 0.0001)a

25–40%

Improved

BCDVA was measured by ETDRS. BCNVA was measured at 20 and 40 cm with the New ETDRS chart 1, using M-unit equivalents for each line of acuity measured. The better of the two BCNVA was reported

SING IMT

Data on file, [47]

Galilean Telescope

×2.7

Phakic

6.5

Monocular

Yes

No

3

75.6

3 (100%) male

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

7%

NR

NR

LMI

[18, 19]

Cassegrain Lens

×2.5

Phakic

6.5

Binocular

Yes

No

6

NR

1 (16.67%) female

5 (83.33%) male

NR

1.47

−0.37

(p = 0.14)a

1.22a

−1.02

(p = 0.14)a

6%

N.S. (p = 0.14)

BCDVA was measured with a Snellen chart. BCNVA was measured using the ETDRS near vision chart at 20 cm

SML

[19, 21]

IOL

×2.0

Phakic/Pseudophakic

2.2

Monocular

No

No

8

NR

NR

NR

0.62b

NS

0.75b at 40 cm

0.52b at 15 cm

−0.21 to −0.44 at 15 cm

(p = UNK)a

NR

NR

Radner chart in German was used to test reading vision

LENTIS MAX

[23]

IOL

×1.5 (N) to ×3 (D)

Phakic

2.2

Binocular

NR

NR

11

80.6

8 (72.7%) female

3 (27.2%) male

NR

0.69

−0.31

(p = UNK)

1.06

−0.38

(p = UNK)

NR

Improved

NR

IOL-AMD

[15, 19]

Double Intraocular Lens

×1.3

Phakic/Pseudophakic

2.8

Binocular

Yes

Yes

12

77

NR

NR

0.92b

−0.22 (p = UNK)b

0.85b

−0.18 (p = UNK)b

18%

NR

CDVA was measured with a Snellen chart. Near acuity was measured with N-point at 40 cm

IOL-VIP System

[13, 19]

Double Intraocular Lens

×1.3 (distance)

Phakic/Pseudophakic

7

Binocular

Yes

Yes

35

73

19 (54.3%) female

16 (45.7%) male

NR

1.29

−0.52

(p = UNK)

NR

NR

7–10%

NR

BCVA was evaluated by the ETDRS chart

EyeMax Mono

[17, 20]

IOL

×1.1–×1.2

Phakic/Pseudophakic

2.2

Binocular

No

No

244

80

146 (59.8%) female

98 (40.2%) male

NR

1.06

−0.35 (p < 0.0001)

1.36

−0.48 (p < 0.0001)

~7% (interpolated from the figure)

Improved

Full subjective refraction BCVA was measured. Near acuity was measured with N-point at 40 cm

Orilens

[19]

Cassegrain Lens

×2.5

NR

5.5

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

NR

  1. BCNVA best-corrected near vision acuity, BCDVA best-corrected distance vision acuity, ETDRS Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study, logMAR Logarithm of the Minimum Angle of Resolution, NR not reported, NS not significant, PRL preferred lens focus, UNK unknown.
  2. aLogMAR calculated from ETDRS score based on methods outlined in Beck et al. (2003).
  3. bLogMAR calculated from corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) and corrected near visual acuity (CNVA) in Snellen decimal scale based on methods outlined in Mataftsi et al. (2019).
Back to article page