Effect of Adjustments in Apodization Pattern of Diffractive Multifocal IOLs on Straylight Measurements–Disability Glare
Narrative Responses:
Purpose
To evaluate the differences in straylight between eyes implanted with hydrophilic apodized diffractive multifocal IOL (Seelens MF, Hanita, Israel) and hydrophobic apodized diffractive multifocal IOLs (ReSTOR, Alcon, USA). The 2 lens types have different apodization patterns. This study seeks to evaluate the effect on straylight of this adjustment in apodization.
Methods
Routinely obtained straylight measurements at 3 months post standard phacoemulsification procedures for either cataract or refractive lens procedures were evaluated and compared.
Patients were implanted with either the SeeLens or BunnyLens with the identical optic design, and different haptic design (Hanita lenses, Israel) a multifocal hydrophilic apodized diffractive IOL [study group/lens], or the SN6AD1 IOL (Alcon, USA), the control group/lens.
Postoperative straylight values, visual acuity, and refractive outcomes were compared.
Results
In 34 eyes a study IOL implanted. In 50 eyes the control IOL was implanted. The difference in straylight was 0.09461 (p<0.01) , with the study lens less straylight.
In terms of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) the study group improved from logMAR 0.05+0.08 to logMAR 0.00+0.04. In the control group the CDVA improved from logMAR 0.05+0.08 to logMAR 0.01+0.05.
Refraction changed from preoperatively +1.36 D+1.99 to +0.08 D+0.52 postoperatively in the study, and from +0.35 D+2.71 preoperatively to +0.08 D+0.32 postoperatively in the control group.
Conclusion
A mean difference in straylight of 0.09461 log (s) was in favor of the SeeLens/BunnyLens type, the hydrophilic IOLs. In terms of postoperative CDVA and refraction, the lenses performed equally well. The adjustment in apodization seems to be the reason for the difference in straylight.