The Influence of the Level of Monovision upon Early Outcomes Following the Bilateral Implantation of an Enhanced Monovision Intraocular Lens

This article provides an assessment of the impact of different levels of monovision upon early visual outcomes and quality of vision (QoV) following the bilateral implantation of enhanced monovision intraocular lenses (IOLs). Consecutive patients implanted bilaterally with the Rayone EMV (Rayner) we...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Richard N. McNeely, Stephen Stewart, Niraj Mandal, Salissou Moutari, Allon Barsam, Jonathan E. Moore
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2025-05-01
Series:Vision
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5150/9/2/41
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849425877522186240
author Richard N. McNeely
Stephen Stewart
Niraj Mandal
Salissou Moutari
Allon Barsam
Jonathan E. Moore
author_facet Richard N. McNeely
Stephen Stewart
Niraj Mandal
Salissou Moutari
Allon Barsam
Jonathan E. Moore
author_sort Richard N. McNeely
collection DOAJ
description This article provides an assessment of the impact of different levels of monovision upon early visual outcomes and quality of vision (QoV) following the bilateral implantation of enhanced monovision intraocular lenses (IOLs). Consecutive patients implanted bilaterally with the Rayone EMV (Rayner) were recruited. The dominant eye was targeted for emmetropia, and myopia was targeted in the nondominant eye. Patients were categorized based upon the postoperative refractive outcome in the nondominant eye as follows: Group A: −0.50 to −1.0 D (<i>n</i> = 40), Group B: <−1.00 = D (<i>n</i> = 46). Uncorrected distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA), and near (UNVA) visual acuity, and QoV were compared 3 months postoperatively. Binocular UIVA was 0.05 ± 0.10 and −0.01 ± 0.11logMAR (<i>p</i> = 0.03) in the two respective groups, and binocular UNVA was 0.23 ± 0.09 and 0.14 ± 0.09logMAR (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Day QoV was 8.77 ± 1.33 and 8.13 ± 1.34 for night QoV in group A, and 8.85 ± 0.99 and 7.85 ± 1.35, respectively, in group B. Group A had a lower spectacle independence rate of 55% compared to 89.1%. This IOL provides a satisfactory range of vision with high QoV satisfaction. A postoperative refractive error of −1.0 D or more in the nondominant eye significantly improves binocular UIVA, UNVA, and spectacle independence, without negatively impacting QoV.
format Article
id doaj-art-5ee3d9a8b7ea44da9c4cf0f8aba5e6fb
institution Kabale University
issn 2411-5150
language English
publishDate 2025-05-01
publisher MDPI AG
record_format Article
series Vision
spelling doaj-art-5ee3d9a8b7ea44da9c4cf0f8aba5e6fb2025-08-20T03:29:38ZengMDPI AGVision2411-51502025-05-01924110.3390/vision9020041The Influence of the Level of Monovision upon Early Outcomes Following the Bilateral Implantation of an Enhanced Monovision Intraocular LensRichard N. McNeely0Stephen Stewart1Niraj Mandal2Salissou Moutari3Allon Barsam4Jonathan E. Moore5Cathedral Eye Clinic, Belfast BT1 2LS, UKCathedral Eye Clinic, Belfast BT1 2LS, UKCathedral Eye Clinic, Belfast BT1 2LS, UKSchool of Mathematics and Physics, Queens University Belfast, Belfast BT7 1NN, UKOCL Vision, London W1G 9TF, UKCathedral Eye Clinic, Belfast BT1 2LS, UKThis article provides an assessment of the impact of different levels of monovision upon early visual outcomes and quality of vision (QoV) following the bilateral implantation of enhanced monovision intraocular lenses (IOLs). Consecutive patients implanted bilaterally with the Rayone EMV (Rayner) were recruited. The dominant eye was targeted for emmetropia, and myopia was targeted in the nondominant eye. Patients were categorized based upon the postoperative refractive outcome in the nondominant eye as follows: Group A: −0.50 to −1.0 D (<i>n</i> = 40), Group B: <−1.00 = D (<i>n</i> = 46). Uncorrected distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA), and near (UNVA) visual acuity, and QoV were compared 3 months postoperatively. Binocular UIVA was 0.05 ± 0.10 and −0.01 ± 0.11logMAR (<i>p</i> = 0.03) in the two respective groups, and binocular UNVA was 0.23 ± 0.09 and 0.14 ± 0.09logMAR (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Day QoV was 8.77 ± 1.33 and 8.13 ± 1.34 for night QoV in group A, and 8.85 ± 0.99 and 7.85 ± 1.35, respectively, in group B. Group A had a lower spectacle independence rate of 55% compared to 89.1%. This IOL provides a satisfactory range of vision with high QoV satisfaction. A postoperative refractive error of −1.0 D or more in the nondominant eye significantly improves binocular UIVA, UNVA, and spectacle independence, without negatively impacting QoV.https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5150/9/2/41extended depth of focusmonofocal plus IOLmonovisionquality of vision
spellingShingle Richard N. McNeely
Stephen Stewart
Niraj Mandal
Salissou Moutari
Allon Barsam
Jonathan E. Moore
The Influence of the Level of Monovision upon Early Outcomes Following the Bilateral Implantation of an Enhanced Monovision Intraocular Lens
Vision
extended depth of focus
monofocal plus IOL
monovision
quality of vision
title The Influence of the Level of Monovision upon Early Outcomes Following the Bilateral Implantation of an Enhanced Monovision Intraocular Lens
title_full The Influence of the Level of Monovision upon Early Outcomes Following the Bilateral Implantation of an Enhanced Monovision Intraocular Lens
title_fullStr The Influence of the Level of Monovision upon Early Outcomes Following the Bilateral Implantation of an Enhanced Monovision Intraocular Lens
title_full_unstemmed The Influence of the Level of Monovision upon Early Outcomes Following the Bilateral Implantation of an Enhanced Monovision Intraocular Lens
title_short The Influence of the Level of Monovision upon Early Outcomes Following the Bilateral Implantation of an Enhanced Monovision Intraocular Lens
title_sort influence of the level of monovision upon early outcomes following the bilateral implantation of an enhanced monovision intraocular lens
topic extended depth of focus
monofocal plus IOL
monovision
quality of vision
url https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5150/9/2/41
work_keys_str_mv AT richardnmcneely theinfluenceofthelevelofmonovisionuponearlyoutcomesfollowingthebilateralimplantationofanenhancedmonovisionintraocularlens
AT stephenstewart theinfluenceofthelevelofmonovisionuponearlyoutcomesfollowingthebilateralimplantationofanenhancedmonovisionintraocularlens
AT nirajmandal theinfluenceofthelevelofmonovisionuponearlyoutcomesfollowingthebilateralimplantationofanenhancedmonovisionintraocularlens
AT salissoumoutari theinfluenceofthelevelofmonovisionuponearlyoutcomesfollowingthebilateralimplantationofanenhancedmonovisionintraocularlens
AT allonbarsam theinfluenceofthelevelofmonovisionuponearlyoutcomesfollowingthebilateralimplantationofanenhancedmonovisionintraocularlens
AT jonathanemoore theinfluenceofthelevelofmonovisionuponearlyoutcomesfollowingthebilateralimplantationofanenhancedmonovisionintraocularlens
AT richardnmcneely influenceofthelevelofmonovisionuponearlyoutcomesfollowingthebilateralimplantationofanenhancedmonovisionintraocularlens
AT stephenstewart influenceofthelevelofmonovisionuponearlyoutcomesfollowingthebilateralimplantationofanenhancedmonovisionintraocularlens
AT nirajmandal influenceofthelevelofmonovisionuponearlyoutcomesfollowingthebilateralimplantationofanenhancedmonovisionintraocularlens
AT salissoumoutari influenceofthelevelofmonovisionuponearlyoutcomesfollowingthebilateralimplantationofanenhancedmonovisionintraocularlens
AT allonbarsam influenceofthelevelofmonovisionuponearlyoutcomesfollowingthebilateralimplantationofanenhancedmonovisionintraocularlens
AT jonathanemoore influenceofthelevelofmonovisionuponearlyoutcomesfollowingthebilateralimplantationofanenhancedmonovisionintraocularlens