About the Possible Mechanisms of the Influence of Optical Intraocular Implants on the Characteristics of Neurosensory Rehabilitation and Adaptation in Patients with Pseudophakia. Literature Review

This literature review analyzed the possible mechanisms of the influence of the design features and optical characteristics of monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) on the characteristics of sensorineural adaptation and visual rehabilitation in patients after cataract phacoemulsification. Bibliographic research of scientific publications was carried out in the following databases: Medline, Pubmed, Cochrane, eLibrary. Languages of publications: Russian and English. The literature review reflects research data on the physicochemical properties, optical surface and color of the IOL filter, spatial contrast sensitivity and wavefront aberrations. Analysis of domestic and foreign literature has demonstrated the absence of a systematic approach to the study of sensorineural adaptation in patients after implantation of monofocal IOLs, which would make it possible to reasonably develop requirements for qualitative and constructive characteristics in the production of intraocular lenses to improve the quantitative and qualitative indicators of their visual functions in order to reduce the terms of rehabilitation and improvement of quality of life indicators in patients with pseudophakia. At the same time, there is an obvious need for research on the influence of the design and quality characteristics of optical intraocular implants on the subjective “quality of vision” of patients with pseudophakia, which is, ultimately, the target indicator of cataract surgery at the present stage. Also, the key mechanisms of neurosensory rehabilitation and adaptation of patients who underwent cataract surgery need to be studied and clarified in order to develop recommendations for the production of intraocular implants.

1. MalovV.M., EroshevskayaE.B., MalovI.V. Pseudo-adaptation in patients with bilateral pseudophakia. Modern problems of science and education = Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya. 2017;11(77):163–165 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.23670/IRJ.2018.77.11.031

2. Finger R., Kupitz D., Holz F., Balasubramaniam B., Ramani R., Lamoureux E., Fenwick E. The impact of the severity of vision loss on vision-related quality of life in India: an evaluation of the IND-VFQ-33. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci.2011;52(9):6081– 6088. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.11-7388

3. Malyugin B.E, Kokin S.A., Pozharitskaya E.M. Comparative evaluation of clinical and functional outcomes and subjective satisfaction in patients with various degrees of anisometropia. SORAN Bulletin. 2014;34(3):67–71 (In Russ.).

4. Lamoureux E., Fenwick E., Pesudovs K., Tan D. The impact of cataract surgery on quality of life. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2011;22(1):19–27. DOI: 10.1097/ICU.0b013e3283414284

5. Lamoureux E., Hooper C., Lim L., Pallant J., Hunt N., Keeffe J., Guymer R. Impact of Cataract Surgery on Quality of Life in Patients with Early Age-Related Macular Degeneration. OptomVis Sci.2007;84(8):683–688. DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e31812f755f

6. Fraser M., Meuleners L., Lee A., Ng JQ, Morlet N. Vision, quality of life and depressive symptoms after first eye cataract surgery. Psychogeriatrics. 2013;13(4):237–243.

7. Malyugin B.E., Isaev M.A., Golovin A.V., Albakova H.M. Comparative characteristics of visual functions and aberrometry data in patients with spherical, aspherical and accommodating IOL models. Ophthalmic Surgery = Oftalmohirurgiya. 2012;1:46–49 (In Russ.).

8. Montés-Micó R., Ferrer-Blasco T., Cerviño A. Analysis of the Possible Benefits of Aspheric Intraocular Lenses: Review of the Literature. Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35(1):172–181. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.09.017

9. Malyugin B.E., Tereshenko A.V., Bely Yu.A., Demyanchenko S.K. Studying the dependence of the resolution of the IOL on the quality of processing of its optical surface. Kuban Scientific Medical Bulletin = Kubanskiy nauchniy medicinskiy vestnik. 2011;1(124):36–38 (In Russ.).

10. Boiko E.V., Vinnitskiy D.A. Rehabilitation of patients after implantation of bifocal and trifocal intraocular lens. Fyodorov Journal of Ophthalmic Surgery. 2018;2:67–74 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.25276/0235-41602018-2-67-74

11. Kershner R.M. Neuroadaptation and premium IOLs: What does the brain think. Ophthalmology Management.2011;15(12):51–54.

12. Rosa A.M., Miranda A., Costa J.F., et al. Functional magnetic resonance imaging as an innovative tool to assess neuroadaptation after cataract surgery. Invest.Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2016;57(12):22–28.

13. Bok Jung G., Kyung-Hyun J., Hun-Kuk P., Physicochemical and surface properties of acrylic intraocular lenses and their clinical significance. J Pharma Investig. 2017;47(5):453–460.

14. Moynihan C., Easteal A., Wilder J., Tucker J. Dependence of the glass transition temperature on heating and cooling rate. Journal of Physical Chemistry. 1974;78(26):2673–2677. DOI: 10.1021/j100619a008

15. Shipp D.W., Sinjab F., Notingher I. Ramanspectroscopy: techniques and applications in the life sciences. Adv. Opt. Photonics. 2017; 9(2):315–428.

16. Tripti, D., Haldar R.S., Geetha S., Niyogi K., Khandal R.K. Materials for intraocular lenses(IOLs): Review of developments to achieve biocompatibility. E-Polymers. 2009;9(1):124–128.

17. Rusciano G., Capaccio A., Pesce G., Sasso A. Experimental study of the mechanisms leading to the formation of glistenings in intraocular lenses by Raman spectroscopy. Biomed Opt Express. 2019;10(4):1870–1881. DOI:10.1364/BOE.10.001870

18. Gregori N.Z., Spencer T.S., Mamalis N., Olson R.J. In vitro comparison of glistening formation among hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lenses. J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 2002;28(7):1262–1268.

19. Waite A., Faulkner N., Olson R.J. Glistening sin the single-piece, hydrophobic, acrylic intraocular lenses. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 2007;144(1):143–144.

20. Nishihara H., Yaguchi S., Onishi T., Chida M., Ayaki M. Surface scattering in implanted hydrophobic intraocular lenses. J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 2003;29(7):1385– 1388. DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(02)01994-6

21. Prinz A., Neumayer T., Buehl W., Vock L., Menapace R., Findl O., Geor-Gopoulos M. Rotational stability and posterior capsule opacification of a plate-haptic and an open-loop-haptic intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011;37:251–257.

22. Yamakawa N., Tanaka T., Shigeta M., Hamano M., Usui M. Surface roughness of intraocular lenses and inflammatory cell adhesion to lens surface. J. Cataract Refract Surg. 2003;29(2):367–370.

23. Takhtayev Yu.V., Bogachuk E.G. Contrast sensitivity with spherical defocusing of various degrees in patients with monofocal and multifocal pseudophakia. Ophthalmological statements = Oftal’mologicheskiye vedomosti. 2015;8(3):5–12 (In Russ.).

24. Schmitz S., Dick H.B., Krummenauer F., et al. Contrast sensitivity and glare disability by halogen lightafter monofocaland multifocal lens implantation. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000;84:1109–1112. DOI: 10.1136/bjo.84.10.1109

25. Trueb P.R., Albach C., Montés-Micó R., Ferrer-Blasco T. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity in eyes implanted with aspheric and spherical intraocular lenses. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:890–895.

26. Schuster A.K., Tesarz J., Vossmerbaeumer U. The impact on vision of aspheric to spherical monofocal intraocular lenses in cataract surgery: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 2013;120:2166–2175.

27. Vivekanand U., Kamath Y.S. A comparison of the contrast sensitivity function between age-matched phakic emmetropes and pseudophakic individuals with aspheric intraocular lenses. Taiwan Journal of Ophthalmology. 2019;9(1):33–36.

28. Calladine D., Evans J.R, Shah S., Leyland M. Multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses after cataract extraction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;9:31–39.

29. Altemir-Gomez I., Millan M.S., Vega F., Bartol-Puyal F., Gimenez-Calvo G. Comparison of visual and optical quality of monofocal versus multifocal intraocular lenses. European Journal of Ophthalmology. 2020;30(2):299–306. DOI: 10.1177/1120672119827858

30. Akkuş Ö.G, Petriçli I.S. Comparison of visual outcomes and reading performance after bilateral implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses with bilateral monofocal intraocular lenses. International Ophthalmology. 2018;38(3):1011–1019.

31. Bhattacharjee H., Bhattacharjee K., Medhi J. Visual performance: Comparison of foldable intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006;32:451–455.

32. Díez-Ajenjo A., García-Domene C., Peris-Martínez C., Artigas J., Felipe A. Effect of the color of the intraocular lens on optical and visual quality ENG. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2014;62(11):1064–1068.

33. Mainster M. A. Spectral transmittance of intraocular lenses and retinal damage from intense light sources. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 1978; 85:167–170.

34. Mainster M. A. Solar retinitis, photic maculopathy and the pseudophakic Eye. J. Am. Intraocul. Implant. Soc. 1978;4:84–86.

35. Mainster M. A. The spectra, classification, and rationale of ultraviolet-protective intraocular lenses. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 1986;102:727–732.

36. Mainster M. A. Intraocular lenses should block UV radiation and violet but not blue light. Arch. Ophthalmol. 2005; 123: 550–555.

37. Caporossi F., Martone G., Casprini F. Prospective Randomized Study of Clinical Performance of 3 Aspheric and 2 Spherical Intraocular Lenses in 250 Eyes. J Refract Surg. 2007;23(7):639–648.

38. Pesudovs K., Dietze H., Owen G., Bruce A., Noble Michael J., Cox J. Effect of cataract surgery incision location and intraocular lens type on ocular aberrations. Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;31(4):725–734. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2004.09.028

39. Iseli H.P., Jankov M., Bueeler M., Wimmersberger Y., Seiler T., Mrochen M. Corneal and Total Wavefront Aberrations in Phakic and Pseudophakic Eyes After Implantation of Monofocal Foldable Intraocular Lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006;32(5):762–771. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2005.10.032

40. Padmanabhan P., Yoon G., Porter J., Rao S.K., Roy J., Choudhury M. Wavefront Aberrations in Eyes With Acrysof Monofocal Intraocular Lenses. J Refract Surg. 2006;22(3):237–242.

41. Rohart C., Lemarinel B., Thanh H.X., Gatinel D. Ocular aberrations after cataract surgery with hydrophobic and hydrophilic acrylic intraocular lenses: comparative study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006;32:1201–1205. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2006.01.099

42. Nochez Y., Majzoub S., Pisella P.J. Effect of residual ocular spherical aberration on objective and subjective quality of vision in pseudophakic eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011;37(6):1076–1081. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.12.056

43. Nochez Y., Majzoub S., Pisella P.J. Effect of interaction of macroaberrations and scattered light on objective quality of vision in pseudophakic eyes with aspheric monofocal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012;38(4):633–640. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.11.030

44. Mayank A., Nanavaty I, Spalton D.J, Boyce J., Saha Sh., Marshall J. Wavefront Aberrations, Depth of Focus, and Contrast Sensitivity With Aspheric and Spherical Intraocular Lenses: Fellow-Eye Study. J Cataract Refract Surg.2009;35(4):663–671. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2008.12.011

45. Denoyer A., Le Lez M-L., Majzoub S., Pisella P-J. Quality of Vision After Cataract Surgery After Tecnis Z9000 Intraocular Lens Implantation: Effect of Contrast Sensitivity and Wavefront Aberration Improvements on the Quality of Daily Vision. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007;33(2):210-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2006.10.035.

46. Anisimova S.Yu., Zagrebelnaya L.V. The quality of the optical system of the eye and the quality of vision after implantation of non-aberrational IOLs. Modern technologies in ophthalmology = Sovremennye tehnologii v oftalmologii. 2018;5:15–17 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.25276/23124911-2018-5-15-16