To study the wavefront aberration of patients with multi-focal IOL implantation and evaluate the imaging quality of IOL, fifty-nine eyes of 56 patients undergoing cataract surgery are collected, including 24 eyes in the multi-focus intraocular lens group and 35 eyes in the single-focus intraocular lens group. The two groups of patients are implanted with Diffractiva-aA multi-focus intraocular lens or Aspira-Aay single-focus intraocular lens, respectively. The wavefront aberration of the operative eye was measured by VISX WaveScan wavefront aberration meter one month after surgery. The results of the two groups of measurement data were compared. The results showed that the total aberration of the multi-focus intraocular lens group and the single-focus intraocular lens group were 1.13±0.19μm and 0.92±0.26μm (F= 0.975, P=0.001) respectively, and the difference was statistically significant. The total high-order aberrations in the multi-focus IOL group were higher than those in the single-focus IOL group, 0.61±0.13μm and 0.38±0.10μm, (F= 0.963, P=0.000), respectively, and the difference was statistically significant. The spherical difference in the multi-focus IOL group was higher than that in the single-focus IOL group, 0.26±0.12μm and 0.16±0.094 μm (F=1.239, P=0.001), respectively, and the difference was statistically significant. Therefore, we conclude that multi-focus intraocular lens can provide patients with better far and near vision after surgery, but higher order aberrations are increased compared with single-focus intraocular lens, which has a negative impact on imaging quality.

Yiming Ma, Danyan Liu, Xi Lv, Tao Lin. Study of wavefront aberration after multi-focal intraocular lens implantation. International Journal of Frontiers in Medicine (2024), Vol. 6, Issue 5: 6-11. https://doi.org/10.25236/IJFM.2024.060502.

[1] Ram J, Agarwal A, Kumar J, et al. Bilateral implantation of multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lens in children above 5 years of age [J]. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 2014, 252(3):441-447. Doi: 10. 1007/s00417-014-2571-0. Epub 2014 Jan 19. 

[2] Bissen-Miyajima H, Minami K, Yoshino M, et al. Surface light scattering and visual function of diffractive multifocal hydrophobic acrylicintraocular lenses 6 years after implantation[J]. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2013, 39(11):1729-1733. doi: 10. 1016/j. jcrs. 2013. 05. 041. Epub 2013 Sep 20. 

[3] Hayashi K, Masumoto M, Takimoto M. Comparison of visual and refractive outcomes after bilateral implantation of toric intraocular lenses with or without a multifocal component [J]. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2015; 41(1):73-83. doi:10. 1016/j. jcrs. 2014. 04. 032. Epub 2014 Nov 11. 

[4] Kamiya K, Hayashi K, Shimizu K, et al. Multifocal intraocular lens explantation: a case series of 50 eyes [J]. Am J Ophthalmol, 2014; 158(2):215-220. doi: 10. 1016/j. ajo. 2014. 04. 010. Epub 2014 Apr 30. 

[5] Hayashi K, Ogawa S, Manabe S, et al. Visual outcomes in eyes with a distance-dominant diffractive multifocal intraocular lens with low near addition power [J]. Br J Ophthalmol, 2015; 99(11):1466-1470. doi: 10. 1136/bjophthalmol-2014-306476. Epub 2015 Apr 14. 

[6] Lee ES, Lee SY, Jeong SY, et al. Effect of postoperative refractive error on visual acuity and patient satisfaction after implantation of the Array multifocal intraocular lens [J]. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2005, 31(10):1960-1965. 

[7] Nochez Y, Majzoub S, Pisella PJ. Effect of residual ocular spherical aberration on objective and subjective quality of vision in pseudophakic eyes[J]. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2011; 37(6):1076-1081. doi: 10. 1016/j. jcrs. 2010. 12. 056. 

[8] Rosa AM, Miranda ÂC, Patrício M, et al. Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Assess the Neurobehavioral Impact of Dysphotopsia with Multifocal Intraocular Lenses [J]. Ophthalmology, 2017 Apr 19. pii: S0161-6420(16)32443-5. doi: 10. 1016/j. ophtha. 2017. 03. 033. 

[9] Maxwell A, Holland E, Cibik L, et al. Clinical and patient-reported outcomes of bilateral implantation of a +2. 5 diopter multifocalintraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017 Jan; 43(1):29-41. doi: 10. 1016/j. jcrs. 2016. 10. 026. 

[10] McNeely RN, Pazo E, Spence A, et al. Comparison of the visual performance and quality of vision with combined symmetrical inferonasal near addition versus inferonasal and superotemporal placement of rotationally asymmetric refractive multifocal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016 Dec; 42(12):1721-1729. doi: 10. 1016/j. jcrs. 2016. 10. 016. 

[11] Tan N, Zheng D, Ye J. Comparison of visual performance after implantation of 3 types of intraocular lenses: accommodative, multifocal, and monofocal. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2014 Sep-Oct; 24(5):693-698. doi: 10. 5301/ejo. 5000425. Epub 2014 Jan 27. 

[12] Ferrer-Blasco T, Madrid-Costa D, García-Lázaro S, et al. Stereopsis in bilaterally multifocal pseudophakic patients. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011 Feb; 249(2):245-251. doi: 10. 1007/s00417-010-1558-8. 

[13] McKelvie J, McArdle B, McGhee C. The influence of tilt, decentration, and pupil size on the higher-order aberration profile of aspheric intraocular lenses. Ophthalmology. 2011; 118: 1724–1731. 

[14] Holladay JT, Piers PA, Koranyi G, et al. A new intraocular lens design to reduce spherical aberration of pseudophakic eyes [J]. J Refract Surg, 2002, 18: 683-691

[15] Wan XH, Li SM, Xiong Y, et al. Ocular monochromatic aberrations in a rural Chinese adult population. Optom Vis Sci. 2014 Jan; 91(1):68-75. doi: 10. 1097/OPX. 0000000000000107. 

[16] Shimozono M, Uemura A, Hirami Y, et al. Corneal spherical aberration of eyes with cataract in a Japanese population. J Refract Surg. 2010 Jun; 26(6):457-459. doi: 10. 3928/1081597X-20100212-03. 

[17] Zhang Hongyang, Guo Haike, Jin Haiying, et al. Comparison sensitivity and higher order aberration of diffractive multi-focus intraocular lens [J]. Chinese Journal of Practical Ophthalmology, 2009, 27 (10), 1097-1100. 

[18] Hun Lee, Kwanghyun Lee, Ji Min Ahn, et al. Evaluation of Optical Quality Parameters and Ocular Aberrations in Multifocal Intraocular Lens Implanted Eyes. Yonsei Med J. 2014 Sep 1; 55(5): 1413–1420. Published online 2014 Jul 18. doi: 10. 3349/ymj. 2014. 55. 5. 1413