Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 29, 2025

Comparison of Three Clinical Stereoscopic Methods for Measuring Binocular Visual Function During Amblyopic Treatment in Unilateral Amblyopia
Published on: September 27, 2024
Comparison of visual function with three intraocular lenses under different illumination conditions
I Baoud Ould Haddi1, D Flores Cervantes2, E Dorronzoro Ramírez3
1Vision and Ophthalmology Research Group, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Purpose:
To assess the visual function in patients undergoing cataract surgery with three distinct intraocular lens types by evaluating contrast sensitivity under varying photopic and mesopic conditions, as well as examining halo perception.
Methods:
Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity were measured under photopic and mesopic lighting conditions. Halo perception was also assessed under mesopic conditions. The study involved patients who received one of the following IOLs: Tecnis® Eyhance™, PhysiOL® IsoPure 123™, or AcrySof® IQ Vivity™. The assessment was performed one month after the implantation of the IOL in the second eye.
Results:
The study included 61 patients and revealed statistically significant differences between the AcrySof® IQ Vivity™ and PhysiOL® IsoPure 123™ IOLs under photopic conditions. The Vivity™ lens demonstrated superior performance compared to the IsoPure 123™ lens at both far (P=0.002) and intermediate distances (P=0.001). Significant differences were also observed between the AcrySof® IQ Vivity™ and Tecnis® Eyhance™ lenses at intermediate distances (P=0.000), with the Vivity™ lens showing better performance than the Eyhance™ lens. Under mesopic conditions, significant discrepancies were found between the PhysiOL® IsoPure 123™ and Tecnis® Eyhance™ lenses at a spatial frequency of 12 cycles per degree (c/g) for long-distance vision (P=0.016), with the Eyhance™ lens outperforming the IsoPure 123™. Furthermore, significant differences were noted when comparing photopic and mesopic conditions for spatial frequencies of 3 cycles per degree (cpg) (P=0.00), 6 cpg (P=0.00), 12 cpg (P=0.013), and 18 cpg (P=0.003), with the Vivity™ lens outperforming other IOL models. The halo perception assessment showed a significant difference between the PhysiOL® IsoPure 123™ and AcrySof® IQ Vivity™ lenses (P=0.012), with the Vivity™ lens exhibiting fewer halos.
Conclusions:
The study's findings indicate that all three intraocular lens (IOL) models performed well in terms of contrast sensitivity under different lighting conditions. Notably, the AcrySof® IQ VivityTM IOL stood out with the least halo perception.
More Related Videos
06:55Scanning Light Scattering Profiler SLPS Based Methodology to Quantitatively Evaluate Forward and Backward Light Scattering from Intraocular Lenses
Published on: June 6, 2017
07:11Assessing Early Stage Open-Angle Glaucoma in Patients by Isolated-Check Visual Evoked Potential
Published on: May 25, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Photoreceptors and Visual Pathways
Focusing of Light in the Eye