Analysis And Comparison Of Premium Intraocular Lens Profiles

Published 2022 - 40th Congress of the ESCRS

Reference: PP01.09 | Type: ESCRS 2022 - Posters | DOI: 10.82333/skkj-qa46

Authors: Vicente J Camps* ¹ , Juanjo J Miret ¹ , Celia Garcia ¹ , María T Caballero ¹ , Juan M Gonzalez-Leal ² , Concha de la vega ³

¹Optics,University of Alicante,San Vicente del Raspeig,Spain, ²Condensed Matter Physics,University of Cadiz,Cadiz,Spain, ³Opthalmology,Vissum Alicante,Alicante,Spain

Purpose

To extract information about premium IOL surfaces design using a profilometer to better understand the optical behavior of them. For this purpose, a spherical, aspherical and high order aspherical best-fit surfaces were considered to obtain surface characteristics of monofocal, EDOF or trifocal IOLs.

Setting

University of Alicante (Spain)

Methods

Four IOLs were used in this study, a standard monofocal IOL (Tecnis 1), a monofocal IOL that provides some depth of focus (Eyhance), a depth of focus IOL based on refractive optics (Mini Well) and a trifocal IOL based on diffractive optics (Synergy). The surface topography of the IOLs was measured by using a multimode optical profilometer. A smoothing process was performed to the raw data extracted from the profilometer. Roughness, noise, and possible artifacts were minimized in order to obtain reliable information about the surface geometry. The smoothed data were fitted using a nonlinear least-square curve fitting algorithm to the sagitta of a spherical surface and the sagitta of an aspheric surface functions.

Results

Anterior surface of Tecnis IOL was aspherical because up to 7 µm were obtained when a spherical surface reference was considered, however, only 0.5 µm were obtained when an aspherical surface reference was used. The posterior surface of Tecnis 1 IOL was spherical. In the Eyhance IOL, posterior surface was spherical. The anterior surface did not match any of our reference surfaces indicating a high order aspherical surface design. In the Mini Well Ready IOL the second surface was spherical. Anterior surface had high order aspherical surface design. The anterior surface of the Synergy IOL was aspherical and the second surface showed a behaviour compatible with a diffractive trifocal IOL that fitted to a spherical surface.

Conclusions

The profilometers provide a raw profile that is necessary to smooth to fit to some known surface. Only studies using spheres as reference surfaces had been carried out. This assumption is insufficient for the analysis of the profiles of many IOLs on the market because an aspheric surface or high order aspheric surface designs as possible best-fit surface provided more information. The high order aspheric surface designs obtained in this study presented differences, regarding best-fit asphere surface, higher than 1 micron. These differences were correlated with the generation of depth of focus. This method was also useful to deduce the base curve of diffractive surfaces.