To log in, click the teal "Login" button in the upper right-hand corner of this page. If you are logged in but still do not have access, please check your 2026 Annual Meeting registration.
Moderator
Jonathan Rubenstein, MD, ABO
Panelists
Richard Davidson, MD, ABO; Omar F. Almallah, MD, ABO
Viewing Papers
Expand a paper title to the right to view the paper abstract and authors. Use the video link to jump to that poster in the session.
Presenting Author
Jonathan Ji, BSc
Co-Authors
William Waldrop (MD), Aishwarya Ramamurthi (None)
Purpose
Posterior capsular opacification (PCO) after light adjustable lens implantation remains largely unstudied. This study aimed to determine its incidence and predictors and to evaluate the safety, timing, and refractive outcomes of YAG capsulotomy performed before and after final lock-in treatments.
Methods
This retrospective analysis included eyes undergoing uncomplicated cataract surgery with light adjustable lens implantation between January 2023 and December 2024. Eyes with visually significant PCO were identified. Extracted data included demographics, ocular history, intraocular lens type, refractive outcomes, and details of YAG capsulotomy relative to lock-in treatments. Multivariate logistical regressions were used to identify associations between baseline characteristics and PCO development, including age, axial length, cataract subtype, and systemic risk factors.
Results
A total of 187 eyes from 102 patients (mean age 67.6 ± 8.9 years; mean follow-up 5.4 ± 2.1 months) were analyzed. The cumulative incidence of visually significant PCO was 9.1% (17 eyes). YAG capsulotomy was performed in 12 eyes before and 5 eyes after lock-in, with a median time of 52 days overall. PCO development was associated with younger age (p=0.006), longer axial length (p<0.001), and posterior subcapsular cataract (p=0.002). Visual acuity and refractive accuracy were preserved, with 85.9% of PCO-free eyes and 82.4% of PCO eyes achieving within 0.25 D of target refraction.
Conclusion
PCO incidence after light adjustable lens implantation was 9.1%. YAG capsulotomy proved safe and effective whether performed before or after lock-in, and the majority of eyes maintained excellent visual acuity and refractive accuracy, supporting favorable outcomes with this lens technology.
Presenting Author
Robert Edward T. Ang, MD
Purpose
To evaluate visual and refractive outcomes of cataract patients with low corneal astigmatism (-0.50 D to -1.50 D) implanted with either a low toric or non-toric trifocal IOL. How low do we need to go?
Methods
This retrospective cohort study included patients with low corneal astigmatism measured by an optical biometer Patients received either a trifocal toric IOL or a trifocal non-toric IOL. Toric implantations formed the TT (True Toric) group. Eyes recommended toric by the Barrett Toric Calculator but were implanted with non-toric IOLs were named as NTT (Non-Toric IOL, Toric) while eyes not recommended for toric IOL were placed in the NTNT group(Non-Toric IOL, Non-Toric). Visual acuity, refraction, and astigmatism were assessed preoperatively and 6–12 months postoperatively.
Results
Among 167 eyes (88 TT, 65 NTT, 14 NTNT), postoperative uncorrected visual acuities were similar across groups. Mean refractive cylinder was lower with TT (-0.40 D) vs NTT (-0.68 D, P < 0.01). In the -0.76 D to -1.00 D against-the-rule subgroup, TT showed superior uncorrected distance acuity (P = 0.01).
Conclusion
The use of the low toric trifocal IOLs resulted in a significant reduction in preoperative corneal astigmatism and good visual outcomes. Our study results showed benefit in correcting preoperative corneal astigmatism of -0.50 D to -1.50 D.Correcting corneal astigmatism of at least -0.75 D with against-the-rule astigmatism was significant.
Presenting Author
Gerd U. Auffarth, MD, PhD
Co-Authors
Alexandra Teodora Negoescu (MD)
Purpose
To evaluate the long-term outcomes including visual performance and patient reported outcomes 15 years after implantation of the accommodative 1-piece dual optic Synchrony IOL (Johnson & Johnson, US, earlier Abbott Medical Optics and Visiogen).
Methods
32 eyes of 20 patients underwent phacoemulsification with mono- or bilateral Synchrony IOL implantation between 2009 and 2011 (mean age 51 ± 14 years). In this ongoing retrospective study, 11 patients (18 eyes) have completed a 15-year follow-up. Assessments included manifest refraction; uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA, CDVA) at 4 m; uncorrected and distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA, DCIVA) at 80 and 66 cm; near visual acuities (UNVA, DCNVA, BCNVA) at 40 cm; defocus curves (+2.0 to -4.0 D); contrast sensitivity; stereopsis; halo/glare simulation; and patient-reported outcomes via the Heidelberg Daily Task Evaluation Questionnaire.
Results
Mean binocular acuity was UDVA/CDVA (0.08/-0.08), UIVA/DCIVA (-0.04/-0.02 at 80 cm; -0.03/0.01 at 66 cm), UNVA/DCNVA (0.02/0.09), and BCNVA (-0.10). Mean postop spherical equivalent was -0.47 ± 0.80D; residual astigmatism -0.89 ± 0.54D. Defocus curves showed 0.10 logMAR or better from +1.0 to -2.0D binocularly and +0.5 to -1.0D monocularly. 57% of binocularly implanted patients required reading glasses and 1 patient received a toric add-on IOL after 11 years. For 4 monocularly implanted, the partner eye was phakic (n=2), had a monofocal IOL (n=1) or trifocal IOL (n=1). 80% were satisfied and would repeat the procedure.
Conclusion
Visual acuity, range of vision and halo/glare perception varied considerably among patients. Patients often required a few seconds of accommodation to reach best acuity at tested distances. The majority of patients were satisfied with the result; dissatisfaction was seen in monocularly-implanted patients
Presenting Author
Collin T. Olevson, BSc
Co-Authors
Tanner Ferguson (MD), Daniel Terveen (MD), Brent Kramer (MD), Vance Thompson (MD), John Berdahl (MD), Lucas Goetz (BSc)
Purpose
To evaluate visual and refractive outcomes of the light adjustable lens (LAL) in eyes with underlying macular pathology.
Methods
Retrospective, consecutive case series of eyes with macular pathology that underwent cataract surgery with implantation of the LAL. All patients underwent light treatments beginning at 4-6 weeks after surgery. Primary outcome measures included uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) and % of eyes within ±0.50 D and ±1.00 D of their refractive target following adjustments.
Results
173 eyes from 107 patients were included. The most common macular pathologies were epiretinal membrane (47.4%) and dry age-related macular degeneration or drusen (36.4%). Among 94 eyes targeted for emmetropia, 74.5% (n=70) achieved a postoperative UDVA of 20/20 or better and 91.5% (n=86) were 20/25 or better. Across all eyes, 83.2% were within ±0.50 D and 65.3% were within ±0.25 D of the refractive target. There was no loss of CDVA comparing pre- and post-adjustments in 98.8% (n=171) of eyes.
Conclusion
Patients with concomitant macular pathology presenting for cataract surgery can achieve favorable visual and refractive outcomes with the LAL. The results of this study support its use in patients with macular disease who are motivated to reduce dependence on glasses.
Presenting Author
John F. Blaylock, MD, FRCSC
Purpose
To assess refractive accuracy of a swept source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) biometer following presbyopia correcting intraocular lens (IOL) implantation.
Methods
This was a prospective, single-site, single arm, observational study of refractive accuracy with the Argos biometer in eyes implanted with the AcrySof Vivity or Clareon PanOptix or IOL. A total of 180 eyes were targeted (90 eyes AcrySof Vivity; 90 eyes Clareon PanOptix). Outcome measures included prediction error, manifest refraction, and monocular visual acuity at 3 months postoperatively.
Results
To date, 182 eyes of 91 subjects have completed the study. Mean absolute prediction errors (APE) overall were 0.22 ± 0.17 D and 0.25 ± 0.23 D in the Vivity and PanOptix groups, respectively. In addition, 92% and 89% of eyes had APE of 0.5 D or less in the Vivity and PanOptix groups, respectively. Mean monocular uncorrected visual acuities at distance, intermediate, and near were 0.07 ± 0.11 logMAR, -0.06 ± 0.10 logMAR, 0.11 ± 0.23 logMAR, respectively in the Vivity group. Mean monocular uncorrected visual acuities at distance, intermediate, and near were 0.02 ± 0.10 logMAR, 0.03 ± 0.14 logMAR, 0.32 ± 0.18 logMAR, respectively in the PanOptix group.
Conclusion
Analysis of results with the Argos biometer with presbyopia correcting IOL implantation suggests high refractive accuracy and good visual outcomes.
Presenting Author
John F. Blaylock, MD, FRCSC
Purpose
To assess visual outcomes and patient reported satisfaction and quality of vision after mix-and-match implantation of the Clareon PanOptix and AcrySof Vivity intraocular lenses (IOLs).
Methods
This was a prospective, single-site, single arm, observational study of clinical outcomes with mix-and-match implantation of the Clareon PanOptix and AcrySof Vivity IOLs. A total of 90 patients were targeted. Outcome measures included binocular visual acuity, and administration of a visual disturbance questionnaire (QUVID), and a satisfaction questionnaire (IOLSAT) at 3 months postoperatively.
Results
A total of 91 subjects completed the study (52 cataract and 50 refractive lens exchange). Mean binocular uncorrected visual acuities postoperatively were -0.02 ± 0.09 logMAR (UDVA), -0.08 ± 0.07 logMAR (UIVA), and 0.07 ± 0.09 logMAR (UNVA). On the QUVID questionnaire, 47% of subjects reported experiencing halo, 33% glare, and 45% starbursts at 3 months postoperatively. However, only 6% of subjects were bothered very much by halos, 3% by glare, and 3% by starbursts. On the IOLSAT, patient-reported spectacle independence (overall) postoperatively was 97% at distance, 94% at intermediate, and 75% at near. In addition, 83% of subjects were satisfied with their vision postoperatively.
Conclusion
The results of this study suggest that mix-and-match implantation of the Clareon PanOptix and AcrySof Vivity IOL can provide excellent visual outcomes, high spectacle independence, and high patient satisfaction.
Presenting Author
Max Liu, BSc
Co-Authors
Zoha Mian (MD, MSc), Ethan Driffill (BSc), Nick Mamalis (MD), Liliana Werner (MD, PhD)
Purpose
It has been described that cell deposits on the surface of intraocular lenses (IOLs) likely detach many years after implantation, and only coverage with proteinaceous material remains. The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term cell deposition on the surface of IOLs made from different materials.
Methods
IOLs explanted as part of standard of care were received in our laboratory immersed in fixative. Patient demographic information, date of implantation, date of explantation, reason for explantation, as well as IOL model and manufacturer were obtained. The lenses underwent gross and light microscopic evaluation without previous staining; those explanted 2 or more years after implantation were selected for inclusion in the study and underwent implant cytology staining (hematoxylin/eosin staining) to assess for the presence of cells, as well proteinaceous deposits on their anterior optic surface.
Results
Thirty-one PMMA lenses, 58 hydrophobic acrylic lenses, 40 hydrophilic acrylic lenses, and 30 silicone lenses, explanted 21.51 +/- 6.55, 10.53 +/- 4.74, 7.41 +/- 3.67, and 10.73 +/- 4.31 years after implantation, respectively, were included in the study. The majority of the IOLs were explanted because of subluxation/luxation; in the hydrophilic acrylic group, opacification was also a major reason for explantation. Nine PMMA lenses and 6 hydrophobic acrylic lenses showed giant cell deposits on their surface. Protein coverage was estimated as 22.52 +/- 19.42%, 22.71 +/- 15.82%, 5.52 +/- 7.43%, and 6.53 +/- 5.85%, respectively, in the aforementioned groups of IOLs.
Conclusion
To the best of our knowledge, there is no implant cytology study evaluating IOLs explanted many years after implantation. Results suggest that cell deposits long-term postoperatively are rare, and mostly related to rough surfaces of positioning holes, multiple Nd:YAG laser pits, as well as recent history of secondary surgery.
Presenting Author
Zachary Ofenloch, BSc
Co-Authors
Katelyn Anagnoste (None), Maya Gurevich (None), Kendall Donaldson (MD, MS)
Purpose
This ongoing study evaluates the perception of visual quality and dysphotopsias when viewing through various intraocular lenses (IOLs) with the SimVis Gekko simulator. The impact of patient age, gender, ocular dominance and pupil size may refine pre-operative counseling and lens selection to improve patient satisfaction with premium IOL technology.
Methods
One hundred healthy volunteers (ages 20-80) with clear lenses or mild cataracts (best-corrected visual acuity 20/40 or better) were enrolled. The SimVis headset was used to simulate several IOL scenarios with monofocal, EDOF and multifocal lenses. For each scenario, patients were asked to rank their subjective visual quality and severity of dysphotopsias (glare and halos) on a scale of 0-5. Results were analyzed according to age, gender, pupil size, and eye dominance. Repeated-measures analyses across scenarios and independent t-tests within scenarios were conducted with multiple-comparison correction.
Results
Distance visual quality in light (p=0.011), dark (p=0.004), and glare (p=0.017) varied significantly by IOL. The monofocal and EDOF lenses were highly rated, while the multifocal lens in the non-dominant eye scored lowest and showed the most glare. Differences were greater in patients aged ?40 years (Scene VQ-dark: Monofocal 4.1, EDOF 4.1 vs Multifocal non-dominant 3.3; p=0.004), in females (Scene VQ-light: Monofocal 4.0, EDOF 4.0 vs Multifocal non-dominant 3.1; p=0.014), and in larger pupils (?4 mm; Scene VQ-dark: Monofocal 4.1, EDOF 4.0 vs Multifocal non-dominant 3.2; p=0.006). Within each scenario, smaller pupils (2-3 mm) rated the EDOF lens higher (Snellen VQ 4.2 vs 3.5; pFDR=0.013).
Conclusion
Visual quality and perception of dysphotopsias was dependent on type of IOL, age, gender, eye dominance, and pupil size. Younger patients were more likely to notice a decrease in image quality and increased glare with EDOF and multifocal lenses. There was a trend toward improvements in visual quality and lower glare scores with smaller pupils.
Presenting Author
Laureano Rementeria, MD, PhD
Co-Authors
Alberto Bellido-Esteban (PhD), Alejandro Garc�a-Pardina (MSc, BSc), Pablo Ruisoto (PhD), Javier Ruiz Alcocer (MSc, PhD)
Purpose
To analyze, in patients implanted with different intraocular lenses (IOLs), the subjective satisfaction with vision and the role of preoperative surgical expectations.
Methods
This observational retrospective study considered patients bilaterally implanted with monocular (n=18), extended depth of focus (EDoF) (n=26) or trifocal (n=40) IOLs. In a preoperative visit, patients completed a questionnaire with sociodemographic data and expectations on the surgery to solve visual problems at different distances. Three months after the surgery, patients completed an 8-point Likert questionnaire about satisfaction with "vision in general", "distance" and "near vision". A linear regression analysis was conducted to analyse the relationship between expectations and patient's satisfaction considering the type of IOL.
Results
Expectations in distance vision did not yield statistically significant effects for general (F(4)=2.189,p=0.078) or far vision (F(4)=1.597,p=0.184). For near vision expectations and vision in general, a statistically significant effect emerged (F(5)=2.833, p<0.05) in monofocal and trifocal lenses. Trifocals decreased general vision satisfaction vs. monofocals, but high near vision expectations reversed this (p=0.04). For near vision satisfaction related to near vision expectations, a statistically significant effect emerged (F(5)=6.464,p<0.001). EDoF IOLs led to lower satisfaction when expectations were high (p<0.001), while trifocals improved satisfaction under the same conditions (p=0.03).
Conclusion
Expectations on far vision don't impact satisfaction, likely due to good distance outcomes with all IOLs. Near vision expectations do affect satisfaction: they reduce it in EDoF IOLs but increase it in trifocal lenses, both for general and near vision satisfaction.
Presenting Author
Natalia G Morales, MD
Co-Authors
Daniel Terveen (MD), Tanner Ferguson (MD), John Berdahl (MD), Brent Kramer (MD), Vance Thompson (MD)
Purpose
To evaluate visual and refractive outcomes of the light-adjustable lens (LAL) in eyes with a history of hyperopic LASIK
Methods
A retrospective, consecutive case series of eyes with a history of hyperopic LASIK implanted with the second-generation light adjustable lens (LAL) targeted for emmetropia at their lock-in. Eyes with a history of concomitant ocular pathology that limited corrected visual acuity were excluded. Primary outcomes included uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA, CDVA), mean refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE) and percentage of eyes within ±0.50 and ±1.00 D of target.
Results
50 eyes were included in the case series. For monocular UDVA, 72% were 20/20 or better, 81% were 20/25 or better, and 94% were 20/30 or better following the lock-in. Eighty percent of eyes were within ±0.50 D of target, with 45% within ±0.25 D of final target. The mean time from surgery to final lock-in was 9.0 ± 3.1 weeks. No patients underwent an IOL exchange.
Conclusion
The LAL provides excellent visual and refractive outcomes in eyes with a history of hyperopic LASIK, a population traditionally linked with reduced accuracy. Postoperative adjustability with the LAL enables precise refractive refinement, making it a highly favorable option in this setting. Data will be updated prior to presentation.
Presenting Author
Mohammad Bakr, MD
Co-Authors
Jeremy Bartley (MD), Margaret Wang (MD, BEng), William Waldrop (MD)
Purpose
LAL and LAL+ provide the option to adjust the refractive target. The manufacturer recommends 3 adjustments followed by lock-in treatment. We sought to evaluate factors associated with the need for more than 2 adjustments in our patient population.
Methods
This is a retrospective chart review. We included patients who underwent cataract surgery with implantation of the LAL or the LAL+ between June 2023 and June 2025. All surgeries were performed by fellowship-trained attending surgeons. The collected data included demographic information (age, sex), prior refractive surgery, ocular dominance, type of lens (LAL/LAL+), use of femtosecond laser, treatment error, and time interval between surgery and adjustments. Linear regression was used to determine the correlation coefficient between different factors and the need for 2 adjustments or fewer vs more than 2 adjustments.
Results
We included 322 eyes (216 patients) who underwent cataract surgery with a LAL. All surgeries and adjustments were performed by fellowship trained ophthalmologists. There were significantly more non-dominant eyes with >2 adjustments (37.8% vs 64.6%, p=0.0001). Comparing eyes with <2 to those with >2 adjustments, we found no significant difference in age (mean[SD] 68.2[8.9] vs 68.3[8.7], p=0.89), sex (Female 60.5% vs 54.7%, p=0.38), use of laser (35.8% vs 35.4%, p=0.95), prior refractive surgery (36.2% vs 32.3%, p=0.56) and LAL vs LAL+ (26.5% vs 18.5%, p=0.18). There was no significant correlation with treatment error (r=0.001, p=0.43) or time interval between surgery and start of adjustments (r=0.003, p=0.34).
Conclusion
Non-dominant eyes that are intended for near vision may be more likely to require more than 2 adjustments after implantation of a light-adjustable lens. Patients who underwent corneal refractive surgery were not found more likely to need more than 2 adjustments. There are no significant differences between LAL and LAL+.
Presenting Author
Himansu S Pattanaik, PhD
Co-Authors
Marcia Ong (MS), James Marotta (PhD), Shinwook Lee (PhD)
Purpose
To investigate and compare the presence of blue haze fluorescence in intraocular lenses (IOLs) composed of different materials when exposed to ultraviolet (UV) light.
Methods
A customized optical system was developed to investigate the presence of fluorescence-induced blue haze in intraocular lenses (IOLs) made from different materials when exposed to ultraviolet (UV) light. The setup included a UV light source with a spectral peak at 365 nm, a model eye, and a high-resolution camera equipped with a 400 nm long-pass filter to block direct UV illumination and capture only emitted blue light. IOLs made of two different hydrophobic acrylic materials: Clareon (Alcon) and Tecnis Optiblue (J&J) were inserted into the model eye to image a distant letter chart at 4m using off-axis UV illumination.
Results
Tecnis Optiblue IOLs produced a distinct blue haze with peak emission around 440 nm, visible in both reflective and transmissive images. The captured scenes in transmission mode appeared tinted by the fluorescence-induced blue haze, suggesting a potential shift in color perception. Clareon IOLs did not exhibit any blue haze under the same conditions.
Conclusion
The Tecnis Optiblue IOL material fluoresces, emitting a blue haze that may potentially contribute to cyanopsia, a blue-tinted visual effect. This study demonstrates the importance of IOL material selection to avoid potential unintended optical effects that may impact visual quality.
Presenting Author
Amisha D Dave, MD
Co-Authors
Geoffrey Nguyen (MD), Paul Kang (MD)
Purpose
Patients are seeking information about their intraocular lens (IOL) options on social media. Surgeons should be aware of these conversations to better understand their patients' perspectives and improve satisfaction with IOL selection. This study analyzes Reddit posts and comments to understand patient perspectives on various types of IOLs.
Methods
This cross-sectional, retrospective study analyzed posts and comments on the r/CataractSurgery subreddit from April 14, 2025 to August 20, 2025. All data were public and accessed using the Python Reddit API Wrapper. Using specific key words and phrases relevant to the different IOL groups, posts and comments were categorized by the type of IOL mentioned within the text: basic monofocal, extended depth of focus (EDOF), toric, multifocal, accommodating, and light adjustable (LAL). Within these categories, posts and comments were analyzed separately for sentiment (positive, negative, neutral) towards the lens type and whether or not the user would recommend that lens to others.
Results
A total of 964 posts were extracted with 735 posts and 7,494 comments referencing IOLs. Overall, the most referenced IOL was the basic monofocal lens, mentioned in 148 posts and 1,696 comments with 32 positive recommendations. The accommodating lens was discussed the least in only 3 posts and 31 comments. Among premium lenses, torics were mentioned most often (1,652 comments) with 298 positive comments, 24 of which recommended torics to others. Torics had the highest ratio (12) of patients recommending the lens as compared to those discouraging use of the lens. The LAL had the highest ratio of positive to negative comments (3.10) while the accommodating lens had the lowest ratio of 0.50.
Conclusion
Patients are sharing their experiences with IOLs on Reddit, potentially influencing other patients' decision making in IOL selection. A surgeon's understanding of which lenses are being positively and negatively recommended can help them better counsel and set expectations with patients regarding the features and drawbacks of different IOLs.
Presenting Author
Ari Stoner, MD
Co-Authors
Richard Davidson (MD), Michael Taravella (MD)
Purpose
To evaluate the refractive outcomes of light adjustable lens (LAL) implantation in eyes with a history of corneal surgery.
Methods
A retrospective review of eyes with prior corneal refractive surgery or keratoplasty that underwent cataract surgery with LAL implantation. The primary outcome was uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCVA), and secondary outcomes included the degree of deviation from the refractive target as measured by the light delivery device.
Results
A total of 33 eyes from 18 patients were included. The cohort included eyes with a history of RK (n=8), LASIK (n=15) and various refractive surgery combinations (RK+LASIK, n=4; PRK+RK, n=2; LASIK+PRK, n=2, LASIK+DMEK, n=1). Additionally, one patient had a history of DALK. Among the RK eyes, 1 had 4 incisions, 10 had 8 incisions, and the remaining 3 eyes had 12, 14, and 18 incisions, respectively. The mean absolute deviation from the planned refraction was 0.35 ± 0.55 D, with all but one eye within ±1.00 D of target. The average residual cylinder was 0.41 ± 0.53 D. UCVA outcomes were as follows: 10 eyes achieved 20/20 or better, 29 eyes had 20/40 or better, and all eyes had 20/70 or better.
Conclusion
LAL implantation in eyes with a history of corneal surgery can achieve excellent visual and refractive outcomes. However, residual refractive error may persist, particularly in eyes with complex corneal histories. The LAL represents a promising option for optimizing refractive outcomes in patients where traditional IOL calculations are challenging.
Presenting Author
Aaishwariya A. Gulani, MD
Co-Authors
Arun Gulani (MD), Yash Gulani (BA)
Purpose
To expand the application of the IC-8 Apthera� pinhole IOL beyond its conventional use in eyes with clear central corneas and paracentral irregularities, by presenting a staged approach in an eye with central corneal scarring and irregular astigmatism associated with prior ectasia and Radial keratotomy.
Methods
A patient with cataract, central corneal scarring, and irregular astigmatism (9.0 D) from ectasia and radial keratotomy underwent cataract extraction with implantation of the IC-8 Apthera� pinhole IOL. Unlike conventional indications (clear central cornea with paracentral irregularities <3.0 D), this case expanded its use to a scarred central cornea. Postoperatively, staged LaZrPlastique based excimer laser surgery was performed to contour the corneal scar and optimize optical clarity while addressing ammetropia to unaided vision.
Results
The IC-8 Apthera� IOL improved functional unaided vision despite the central corneal scar, leveraging pinhole optics to reduce higher-order aberrations. Following staged LaZrPlastique scar remodeling, the patient achieved significant gains in unaided and best-corrected visual acuity and quality of vision. Corneal regularity and optical performance improved, demonstrating the synergistic value of staged corneal and lens-based strategies.
Conclusion
The IC-8 Apthera� pinhole IOL can be successfully expanded to eyes with central corneal scars, when staged with corneal remodeling techniques such as LaZrPlastique. This case highlights how combining premium IOL optics with refractive corneal surgery can restore functional vision in highly irregular and scarred eyes.
