Clinical Outcomes After Rotationally Asymmetric Refractive Multifocal Intraocular Lens Implantation In Eyes With Corneal Irregular Astigmatism

Published 2022 - 40th Congress of the ESCRS

Reference: PO211 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/1nhm-bq62

Authors: Hea Young Oh* ¹ , Woong-Joo Whang ² , Byung-Jin Kim ¹ , Hyung-Goo Kwon ³ , Young-Sik Yoo ¹

¹Department of Ophthalmology,Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital,Uijeongbu-si,Korea, Republic Of, ²Department of Ophthalmology,Yeouido St. Mary's Hospital,Seoul,Korea, Republic Of, ³Keye Eye Center,Seoul,Korea, Republic Of

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of asymmetric refractive multifocal IOL implantation in cataract patients with corneal irregular astigmatism.

Setting

This retrospective study was conducted on patients who had corneal irregular astigmatism on the corneal topography obtained from Scheimpflug camera and underwent cataract surgery with asymmetric refractive multifocal IOL (LS-313 MF; Oculentis GmbH, Berlin, Germany).

Methods

The group with corneal astigmatism (total corneal refractive power zone 3mm obtained from Scheimpflug camera) value of less than 1.0D prior to surgery (Group A, n=21) was treated without correction of astigmatism, and the group with corneal astigmatism value of 1.0 or more (Group B, n=20) was treated with toric mIOL.

The results of postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and uncorrected near visual acuity(UNVA), refractive outcomes, corneal aberration (6mm of measurement area), corneal topography, ocular aberration (5mm of measurement area), and contrast sensitivity measured 3 months after surgery were compared between the two groups.

Results

Postoperative refractive outcomes and astigmatism were not significantly different between two groups. (p=0.32) Correction index was 0.60±0.75 in group B. Total high order aberration, coma, and trefoil measured before and after surgery showed a larger amount in Group B than in Group A. (all P<0.01) There was no difference between the two groups in total high order aberration and coma after surgery. There was no difference between the two groups in UDVA (P=0.65), but B (0.028±0.101 logMAR) had better UNVA than A (0.132±0.15 logMAR). (P=0.006) Contrast sensitivity in photopic and mesopic condition showed better results in group A than B. (all P<0.01)

Conclusions

Asymmetric refractive mIOL to correct corneal irregular astigmatism may be an option for correcting presbyopia in cataract patients. Implantation of asymmetric refractive mIOL could correct corneal irregular astigmatism, but it may cause decrease in postoperative contrast sensitivity.