To detect and compare the predictors of “overall patient satisfaction” with an EDOF/+3.25 versus +3.25/+3.25 versus +4.00/+4.00 diffractive multifocal IOLs.

Bucci Laser Vision Institute, Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA.

Non-interventional, observational, retrospective-prospective.

A total of 55 (EDOF/+3.25) “best case patients” with 1) 4 months neuroadaptation 2) corrected residual refractive error 3) necessary YAGs performed and 4) aggressive ocular surface management underwent regression analysis to identify predictors of “overall patient satisfaction”. Satisfaction was regressed against 40 independent variables – 31 clinical metrics such as reading speed and acuity, angle kappa, aberrations, mesopic pupil size, residual spherical equivalent and astigmatism, near, intermediate vision at fixed and preferred focal distances, etc., and 9 responses from a questionnaire evaluating the performance of everyday tasks. Results were compared to two prior cohorts (67 bilateral +3.25 and 55 bilateral +4.00) with identicaintermediate and distance vision, despite scoring less for near vision with fine print and no difference with moderate print. Regression predicted better intermediate vision with smaller mesopic pupils with the +3.25 and +4.00 IOLs.

The EDOF/+3.25 patients had equal patient satisfaction vs the bilateral +3.25, and greater satisfaction vs the bilateral +4.00 patients because of significantly better intermediate and distance vision, despite scoring less for near vision with fine print and no difference with moderate print. Regression predicted better intermediate vision with smaller mesopic pupils with the +3.25 and +4.00 IOLs.

To evaluate visual and subjective outcomes after bilateral mix-and-match implantation of one-piece diffractive multifocal IOLs in different near add powers (+2.75 D, +3.25 D, +4.0 D).

Four US clinics.

Prospective, multi-center, parallel comparison clinical study design.

Two treatment groups received implantation with either the +3.25 D (ZLB00) or the +4.00 D (ZMB00) Tecnis

Multifocal 1-piece IOL in their non-dominant eye, and the +2.75 D (ZKB00) Tecnis Multifocal 1-piece IOL in their dominant eye (Abbott Medical Optics, Inc., Santa Ana, CA). Each study patient underwent the same routine cataract extraction procedures for each eye, with the second eye scheduled to undergo cataract extraction within 7 to 30 days after the 1st eye surgery. Visual and subjective outcomes were evaluated at 90 days after 2nd eye surgery for the two groups +3.25D/+2.75D (n=41) and +4.00D/+2.75D (n=36).

Mean binocular uncorrected distance visual acuities at 90 days postop were 0.02 ± 0.082 (+3.25D/+2.75D) vs 0.07 ± 0.128 (+4.00D/+2.75D) (p=0.025). Mean binocular uncorrected intermediate visual acuities at 90 days postop were 0.14 ± 0.185 (+3.25D/+2.75D) vs 0.26 ± 0.261 (+4.00D/+2.75D) (p=0.024). Mean binocular uncorrected near visual acuities at 90 days postop were 0.06 ± 0.098 (+3.25D/+2.75D) vs 0.19 ± 0.286 (+4.00D/+2.75D) (p=0.018). Over 88% of patients reported “none” for visual symptoms of glare, halos, starburst, or other. Freedom from glasses or contacts was reported by groups +3.25D/+2.75D and +4.00D/+2.75D as follows distance (95.1% vs 97.1%), intermediate (92.7% vs 94.1%), and near activities (82.9% vs 64.7%).

At 90 days postoperatively, both groups demonstrated good visual and subjective outcomes; however, differences in near and intermediate outcomes favored the +3.25/+2.75 IOL combination.

NCT02863159 (08/11/2016).

NCT02863159 (08/11/2016).

To evaluate the efficacy of additional thermal pulsatile system compared to standard lid hygiene alone in meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) patients who are using long-term anti-glaucoma medications.

Well-controlled glaucoma patients who used anti-glaucoma medications for at least 1 year and had MGD were enrolled and randomized between a study group who received thermal pulsatile system (Lipiflow

) treatment and standard lid hygiene, and a control group who received standard lid hygiene alone. The primary outcome was meibomian gland expression score, and the secondary outcomes were the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) score, Schirmer test score, tear break-up time (TBUT), corneal staining score, lipid layer thickness (LLT), and meibography score. All the outcomes were re-evaluated at 1 week, then at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment.

Of 60 participants who underwent randomization, 48 completed the study. At the 6-month mark, this study could not demonstrate any significant difference between groupsre damaged meibomian gland induced by long-term anti-glaucoma medications.

To compare the subjective preoperative experiences of patients undergoing their first- or second-cataract surgeries.

Consecutive patients undergoing phacoemulsification were asked to complete postoperative questionnaires evaluating their subjective preoperative experiences, including their emotional state, decision-making process, and opinions on the admission and examination processes, medical interviews, and quality of service. The obtained data were compared between patients undergoing their first (group I)- or second (group II)-cataract surgeries.

Two hundred patients (group I, 124; group II, 76) were included in the evaluation. Presurgical anxiety was more prevalent in group I than in group II (55.7% vs 34.2%,

= 0.005). Fear was the major trigger for reconsidering the decision to undergo surgery, with 29% and 13.2% of patients in groups I and II, respectively, considering abandoning the operation (

= 0.016). The preoperative medical examination was reported to be sufficiently accurate by 66.1%nder the number NCT04327856.Keratoplasty is one of the irreplaceable treatment options for corneal diseases. check details Currently, there is no evidence to substantiate that harvested corneal grafts from COVID-19 patients can contain SARS-CoV-2 virus and lead to a systemic infection. Although the risk of transmission through corneal stromal tissue is low, it potentially exists. Lack of clinical data, unclear potential of donor-derived infection and non-established recommendations for transplantation during the COVID-19 pandemic have resulted in a dramatic reduction in the number of keratoplasty and cornea donors at ophthalmology departments and eye banks. To eliminate the risk of infection of recipients and medical personnel, we suggest that the blood samples of all donors should be screened with RT-PCR tests and nasopharyngeal swabs should be taken. In addition, a chest CT scan should be performed if the circulation is maintained. Moreover, the donors’ clinical and epidemiological medical history must be screened for typical symptoms and potential contact with SARS-CoV-2 carriers to reduce the risk of transmission.