Comparison of Short-Term Visual Outcome of Multifocal IOL Implantation With Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery and With Conventional Surgery

Saturday, April 26, 2014: 4:15 PM
Room 151B (Boston Convention and Exhibition Center)
Soon-Phaik Chee, FRCSE, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore
Younian Yang, Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore
Seng-Ei Ti, FRCS(Ed), Singapore National Eye Centre, Singapore, Singapore

Narrative Responses:

Purpose
To compare the visual outcomes of an aspheric diffractive multifocal intraocular lens implant (IOL) implanted using femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) versus conventional phacoemulsification surgery.

Methods
A retrospective case control study using audit data was performed to compare results of FLACS cases (N=103) with the conventional phacoemulsification cases (N=106) in the Singapore National Eye Centre. The diffractive multifocal (MF) or multifocal toric (MFT) IOL were studied in both groups. Unaided and best corrected visual acuities (UAVA, BCVA) and refractive accuracy (mean absolute error (MAE) of spherical equivalent) were examined. Results of FLACS cases were compared with the controls. In addition, the distance UAVA of cases was compared with monofocal controls (random sample cases using aspheric monofocal lens).

Results
FLACS cases were significantly with more eyes achieved 20/20 and 20/25 or better for distance unaided than conventional surgery (Fisher’s exact test; P=0.011, P=0.012). Unaided near vision was similar.  Compared with monofocal controls, eyes with conventional phacoemulsification had similar UAVA but FLACS cases resulted in more eyes that achieved 20/25 or better and 20/30 or better (Fisher’s exact test; P=0.001, P=0.059).  There was no difference in BCVA between FLACS cases with conventional phacoemulsification. The MAE (0.309 ±0.252 D) in FLACS cases was similar to the controls (0.307 ±0.229 D).

Conclusion
FLACS with implantation of a MF or MFT IOL implant achieved better UAVA for distance than when surgery was done using conventional phacoemulsification, not accounted for by the MAE which was not different.