Reversible Multifokalität durch Polypseudophakie

Isabella Diana Baur; Grzegorz Labuz; Timur Mert Yildirim; Gerd U. Auffarth; Ramin Khoramnia

doi:10.1055/a-2079-1692

Klinische Monatsblätter für Augenheilkunde, Table of Contents

Klin Monbl Augenheilkd 2023; 240(08): 981-988
DOI: 10.1055/a-2079-1692

Übersicht/Review

Reversible Multifokalität durch Polypseudophakie

Article in several languages: deutsch | English

Isabella Diana Baur

International Vision Correction Research Centre (IVCRC) und David J Apple International Laboratory for Ocular Pathology, Univ.-Augenklinik Heidelberg, Deutschland

,

Grzegorz Labuz

International Vision Correction Research Centre (IVCRC) und David J Apple International Laboratory for Ocular Pathology, Univ.-Augenklinik Heidelberg, Deutschland

,

Timur Mert Yildirim

International Vision Correction Research Centre (IVCRC) und David J Apple International Laboratory for Ocular Pathology, Univ.-Augenklinik Heidelberg, Deutschland

,

Gerd U. Auffarth

International Vision Correction Research Centre (IVCRC) und David J Apple International Laboratory for Ocular Pathology, Univ.-Augenklinik Heidelberg, Deutschland

,

Ramin Khoramnia

International Vision Correction Research Centre (IVCRC) und David J Apple International Laboratory for Ocular Pathology, Univ.-Augenklinik Heidelberg, Deutschland

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Zusammenfassung

Die kombinierte Implantation einer monofokalen oder monofokal-torischen Intraokularlinse (IOL) in den Kapselsack und einer multifokalen IOL in den Sulcus ciliaris (sog. Duett-Verfahren) erlaubt es, eine Multifokalität zu erzeugen, die einfacher reversibel ist als die Implantation einer kapselsackfixierten multifokalen IOL. Die optische Qualität und Ergebnisse mit dem Duett-Verfahren sind äquivalent zu denen einer kapselsackfixierten multifokalen Optik. Patienten, bei denen eine Unverträglichkeit der Nebenwirkungen multifokaler Optiken auftritt, oder die im Laufe ihres Lebens eine okuläre Erkrankung mit Funktionsverlust, wie z. B. eine altersbedingte Makuladegeneration (AMD) oder ein Glaukom entwickeln, können von der einfacheren Reversibilität des Verfahrens profitieren.

Schlüsselwörter

Multifokalität - Presbyopiekorrektur - Reversibilität

Full Text

References

References/Literatur
1 Gayton JL, Sanders VN. Implanting two posterior chamber intraocular lenses in a case of microphthalmos. J Cataract Refract Surg 1993; 19: 776-777
2 Gayton JL, Apple DJ, Peng Q. et al. Interlenticular opacification: clinicopathological correlation of a complication of posterior chamber piggyback intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 2000; 26: 330-336
3 Werner L, Apple DJ, Pandey SK. et al. Analysis of elements of interlenticular opacification. Am J Ophthalmol 2002; 133: 320-326
4 Hesse RJ. Refractive changes produced by capsule contraction after piggyback acrylic intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28: 2229-2230
5 Kahraman G, Amon M. New supplementary intraocular lens for refractive enhancement in pseudophakic patients. J Cataract Refract Surg 2010; 36: 1090-1094
6 Gerten G, Kermani O, Schmiedt K. et al. Dual intraocular lens implantation: Monofocal lens in the bag and additional diffractive multifocal lens in the sulcus. J Cataract Refract Surg 2009; 35: 2136-2143
7 Thomas BC, Auffarth GU, Reiter J. et al. Implantation of three-piece silicone toric additive IOLs in challenging clinical cases with high astigmatism. J Refract Surg 2013; 29: 187-193
8 Abela-Formanek C, Amon M, Schild G. et al. Uveal and capsular biocompatibility of hydrophilic acrylic, hydrophobic acrylic, and silicone intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002; 28: 50-61
9 Richter-Mueksch S, Kahraman G, Amon M. et al. Uveal and capsular biocompatibility after implantation of sharp-edged hydrophilic acrylic, hydrophobic acrylic, and silicone intraocular lenses in eyes with pseudoexfoliation syndrome. J Cataract Refract Surg 2007; 33: 1414-1418
10 Gundersen KG, Potvin R. Refractive and visual outcomes after implantation of a secondary toric sulcus intraocular lenses. Clin Ophthalmol 2020; 14: 1337-1342
11 Gundersen KG, Potvin R. A review of results after implantation of a secondary intraocular lens to correct residual refractive error after cataract surgery. Clin Ophthalmol 2017; 11: 1791-1796
12 Huerva V. Piggyback multifocal IOLs for a hyperopic–presbyopic surprise after cataract surgery in high myopic patients. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 2014; 37: 57-59
13 Gundersen KG, Gjerdrum B, Potvin R. Efficacy of a Secondary Trifocal Sulcus IOL in Providing Near and Intermediate Vision in Patients with Prior Myopic Laser Vision Correction and Cataract Surgery. Clin Ophthalmol 2022; 16: 2219-2226
14 Gundersen KG, Potvin R. Refractive and Visual Outcomes After Implantation of a Secondary Sulcus Intraocular Lens with an Extended Depth of Focus. Clin Ophthalmol 2022; 16: 1861-1869
15 Scharioth GB. New add-on intraocular lens for patients with age-related macular degeneration. J Cataract Refract Surg 2015; 41: 1559-1563
16 Khoramnia R, Yildirim TM, Son HS. et al. Reversible Trifokalität durch das Duett-Verfahren. Ophthalmologe 2020; 117: 999-1004
17 Baur ID, Auffarth GU, Łabuz G. et al. Clinical outcomes in patients after duet procedure for reversible trifocality using a supplementary trifocal IOL. Am J Ophthalmol 2022; 241: 217-226
18 Feldhaus L, Mayer WJ, Siedlecki J. et al. Myope multifokale Duett-Implantation zur Korrektur von Presbyopie und Myopie. Ophthalmologie 2022;
19 Yildirim TM, Auffarth GU, Son HS. et al. Duettverfahren bei hoher Myopie zum Erreichen einer reversiblen Multifokalität. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd 2020; 237: 858-960
20 Son HS, Tandogan T, Liebing S. et al. In vitro optical quality measurements of three intraocular lens models having identical platform. BMC Ophthalmol 2017; 17: 108
21 Gatinel D, Houbrechts Y. Comparison of bifocal and trifocal diffractive and refractive intraocular lenses using an optical bench. J Cataract Refract Surg 2013; 39: 1093-1099
22 Cochener B. Prospective clinical comparison of patient outcomes following implantation of trifocal or bifocal intraocular lenses. J Refract Surg 2016; 32: 146-151
23 Jonker SM, Bauer NJ, Makhotkina NY. et al. Comparison of a trifocal intraocular lens with a + 3.0 D bifocal IOL: results of a prospective randomized clinical trial. J Cataract Refract Surg 2015; 41: 1631-1640
24 Rodov L, Reitblat O, Levy A. et al. Visual outcomes and patient satisfaction for trifocal, extended depth of focus and monofocal intraocular lenses. J Refract Surg 2019; 35: 434-440
25 Monaco G, Gari M, Di Censo F. et al. Visual performance after bilateral implantation of 2 new presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses: trifocal versus extended range of vision. J Cataract Refract Surg 2017; 43: 737-747
26 Breyer DR, Kaymak H, Ax T. et al. Multifocal intraocular lenses and extended depth of focus intraocular lenses. Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila) 2017; 6: 339-349
27 Ferreira TB, Ribeiro FJ, Silva D. et al. Comparison of refractive and visual outcomes of 3 presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refrac Surg 2022; 48: 280-287
28 Gabrić N, Gabrić I, Gabrić K. et al. Clinical Outcomes With a New Continuous Range of Vision Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lens. J Refract Surg 2021; 37: 256-262
29 Baur ID, Auffarth GU, Łabuz G. et al. Clinical Evaluation of Reading Performance in Refractive Lens Exchange with a Diffractive Continuous-Range-Of-Vision Intraocular Lens. Am J Ophthalmol 2023; 250: 25-27
30 de Vries NE, Webers CA, Touwslager WR. et al. Dissatisfaction after implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 2011; 37: 859-865
31 Woodward MA, Randleman JB, Stulting RD. Dissatisfaction after multifocal intraocular lens implantation. J Cataract Refract Surg 2009; 35: 992-997
32 Mamalis N, Brubaker J, Davis D. et al. Complications of foldable intraocular lenses requiring explantation or secondary intervention–2007 survey update. J Cataract Refract Surg 2008; 34: 1584-1591
33 Yildirim TM, Auffarth GU, Son HS. et al. Bilateral trifocal IOL implantation in a pediatric case of cataract following steroid-therapy for acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep 2018; 13: 46-49
34 Li JQ, Welchowski T, Schmid M. et al. Prevalence and incidence of age-related macular degeneration in Europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Ophthalmol 2020; 104: 1077-1084
35 Kolko M, Horwitz A, Thygesen J. et al. The prevalence and incidence of glaucoma in Denmark in a fifteen year period: a nationwide study. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0132048
36 Leysen I, Bartholomeeusen E, Coeckelbergh T. et al. Surgical outcomes of intraocular lens exchange: five-year study. J Cataract Refract Surg 2009; 35: 1013-1018
37 Marques FF, Marques DM, Osher RH. et al. Longitudinal study of intraocular lens exchange. J Cataract Refract Surg 2007; 33: 254-257
38 Chang DF, Masket S, Miller KM. et al. Complications of sulcus placement of single-piece acrylic intraocular lenses: recommendations for backup IOL implantation following posterior capsule rupture. J Cataract Refract Surg 2009; 35: 1445-1458
39 Mamalis N, Crandall AS, Pulsipher MW. et al. Intraocular lens explantation and exchange: a review of lens styles, clinical indications, clinical results, and visual outcome. J Cataract Refract Surg 1991; 17: 811-818
40 Baur ID, Auffarth GU, Yildirim TM. et al. Reversibility of the duet procedure: Bilateral exchange of a supplementary trifocal sulcus-fixated intraocular lens for correction of a postoperative refractive error. Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep 2020; 20: 100957
41 Khoramnia R, Yildirim TM, Baur I. et al. Duet procedure to achieve reversible trifocality in a young patient with hereditary hyperferritinemia-cataract syndrome. Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep 2021; 21: 101026
42 Khoramnia R, Auffarth GU, Rabsilber TM. et al. Implantation of a multifocal toric intraocular lens with a surface-embedded near segment after repeated LASIK treatments. J Cataract Refract Surg 2012; 38: 2049-2052
43 Manzouri B, Dari ML, Claoué C. Supplementary IOLs: monofocal and multifocal, their applications and limitations. Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila) 2017; 6: 358-363
44 Falzon K, Stewart OG. Correction of undesirable pseudophakic refractive error with the Sulcoflex intraocular lens. J Refract Surg 2012; 28: 614-619
45 Khan MI, Muhtaseb M. Performance of the Sulcoflex piggyback intraocular lens in pseudophakic patients. J Refract Surg 2011; 27: 693-696
46 Palomino-Bautista C, Sánchez-Jean R, Gonzalez DC. et al. Spectacle independence for pseudophakic patients–experience with a trifocal supplementary add-on intraocular lens. Clin Ophthalmol 2020; 14: 1043-1054
47 Albayrak S, Comba ÖB, Karakaya M. Visual performance and patient satisfaction following the implantation of a novel trifocal supplementary intraocular lens. Eur J Ophthalmol 2021; 31: 2346-2352
48 Cassagne M, Porterie M, Gauthier L. et al. Primary sulcus implantation of a diffractive multifocal pseudophakic piggyback intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 2018; 44: 266-273
49 Łabuz G, Auffarth GU, Knorz MC. et al. Trifocality achieved through polypseudophakia: optical quality and light loss compared with a Single trifocal intraocular lens. J Refract Surg 2020; 36: 570-577
50 Sirohi RS. Introduction to Optical Metrology. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2017
51 Schrecker J, Zoric K, Meßner A. et al. Effect of interface reflection in pseudophakic eyes with an additional refractive intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg 2012; 38: 1650-1656
52 Erie JC, Bandhauer MH, McLaren JW. Analysis of postoperative glare and intraocular lens design. J Cataract Refract Surg 2001; 27: 614-621
53 Valvecchia G, Cervantes-Coste G, Asis O. et al. Clinical outcomes of the piggyback secondary implantation of a novel multifocal lens in the ciliary sulcus: a case series. Eur J Ophthalmol 2023; 33: 1367-1372
54 Prager F, Amon M, Wiesinger J. et al. Capsular bag–fixated and ciliary sulcus-fixated intraocular lens centration after supplementary intraocular lens implantation in the same eye. J Cataract Refract Surg 2017; 43: 643-647
55 Łabuz G, Auffarth GU, Yan W. et al. Simulations of Decentration and Tilt of a Supplementary Sulcus-Fixated Intraocular Lens in a Polypseudophakic Combination Using Ray-Tracing Software. Photonics 2021; 8: 309
56 McLintock CA, McKelvie J, Niyazmand H. et al. Outcomes of a toric monofocal piggyback intraocular lens for residual astigmatic refractive error in pseudophakic eyes. Curr Eye Res 2022; 47: 443-449
57 McLintock CA, McKelvie J, Gatzioufas Z. et al. Outcomes of toric supplementary intraocular lenses for residual astigmatic refractive error in pseudophakic eyes. Int Ophthalmol 2019; 39: 1965-1972
58 Meyer JJ, Kim BZ, Ziaei M. et al. Postoperative rotation of supplementary sulcus-supported toric intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 2017; 43: 285-288