Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multifocal Intraocular Lenses: The Johnson and Johnson Family of Lenses

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

Part of the book series: Essentials in Ophthalmology ((ESSENTIALS))

  • 939 Accesses

Abstract

Invested with a long tradition in this field of expertise, the development of the various IOLs reflects Johnson and Johnson’s (J&J) support in the progress of optics in terms of understanding the qualitative vision, its evaluation, and the integration of these factors in the development of their implants.

Thus, AMO has become a pioneer in aspherical implants with the proposal of the first monofocal implant with negative spherical aberration validated by the FDA for the optimized mesopic vision it provides.

A pioneer in the field of multifocality, where it reigned supreme for more than 10 years with the Rezoom® refractive implant, J&J (Previously AMO) also accompanied the return of diffractive concepts with the arrival of the bifocal TECNIS®, which will be successively developed with variable additions (+4 D, +3.25 D, +2.75D), in order to be as personalized as possible to the needs of each patient.

But it is undoubtedly the development of the Symfony®, with an extended focal zone, inaugurating the field of the so-called extended depth of field implants, which has made the great success of J&J’s surgical department. This implant would be positioned as a good compromise between a monofocal (correcting only distance vision but with 100% of the light transmitted to the retina) and a multifocal with two distinct focal points (ensuring good near and far vision but at the cost of sometimes reported photic phenomena).

Lastly, we must not forget the common denominator of all these implants, which is the hydrophobic biomaterial, glistening free, and the C-loop one-piece design with a preventive square edge of the PCO.

We propose here to describe this TECNIS® platform, to discuss the optical specificities of the different available concepts, and to review the reported clinical results in order to establish a state of the art between theoretical advantages and clinical reality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Bibliography

  1. Miyata A, Yaguchi S. Equilibrium water content and glistenings in acrylic intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004 Aug;30(8):1768–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gunenc U, Oner FH, Tongal S, Ferliel M. Effects on visual function of glistenings and folding marks in AcrySof intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001 Oct;27(10):1611–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Holladay JT, Piers PA, Koranyi G, van der Mooren M, Norrby NE. A new intraocular lens design to reduce spherical aberration of pseudophakic eyes. J Refract Surg. 2002;18(6):683–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bellucci R, Scialdone A, Buratto L, et al. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity comparison between Tecnis and AcrySof SA60AT intraocular lenses: a multicenter randomized study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005;31(4):712–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kennis H, Huygens M, Callebaut F. Comparing the contrast sensitivity of a modified prolate anterior surface IOL and of two spherical IOLs. Bull Soc Belge Ophtalmol. 2004;294:49–58.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kershner RM. Retinal image contrast and functional visual performance with aspheric, silicone, and acrylic intraocular lenses. Prospective evaluation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003;29(9):1684–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Martinez Palmer A, Palacin Miranda B, Castilla Cespedes M, et al. Spherical aberration influence in visual function after cataract surgery: prospective randomized trial. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol. 2005;80(2):71–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Mester U, Dillinger P, Anterist N. Impact of a modified optic design on visual function: clinical comparative study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003;29(4):652–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Packer M, Fine IH, Hoffman RS, Piers PA. Prospective randomized trial of an anterior surface modified prolate intraocular lens. J Refract Surg. 2002;18(6):692–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Piers PA. Use of adaptive optics to determine the optimal ocular spherical aberration. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007;33:1721–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wang L, Koch DD. Ocular higher-order aberrations in individuals screened for refractive surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003;29:1702–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhao H, Mainster MA. The effect of chromatic dispersion on pseudophakic optical performance. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007;91(9):1225–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Yoon G, Williams DR. Visual performance after correcting the monochromatic and chromatic aberrations of the eye. J Opt Soc Am A. 2002;19:266–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Manzanera S, Piers P, Weeber H, Artal P. Visual benefit of the combined correction of spherical and chromatic aberrations. Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48. E-Abstract 1513.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mainster MA. Violet and blue light blocking intraocular lenses: photoprotection vs. photoreception. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90:784–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Jackson GR, Owsley C. Scotopic sensitivity during adulthood. Vis Res. 2000;40(18):2467–73.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Thapan K, Arendt J, Skene DJ. An action spectrum for melatonin suppression: evidence for a novel non-rod, non-cone photoreceptor system in humans. J Physiol. 2001;535:261–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Asplund R, Eidervik LB. The development of sleep in persons undergoing cataract surgery. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2002;35(2):179–87.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rozot P. Cochener B–Implants multifocaux- rapport SFO. 2012. “Presbytie”.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Alfonso JF, Fernández-Vega L, Amhaz H, Montés-Micó R, Valcárcel B, Ferrer-Blasco T. Visual function after implantation of an aspheric bifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35(5):885–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Asplund R, Lindblad BE. Sleep and sleepiness 1 and 9 months after cataract surgery. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2004;38:69–75.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Chew EY, Sperduto RD, Milton RC, et al. Risk of advanced age-related macular degeneration after cataract surgery: AREDS report 25. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:297–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Christiansen G, Durcan FJ, Olson RJ, Christiansen K. Glistenings in the AcrySof intraocular lens: pilot study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001;27:728–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Glasser A, Campbell MC. Presbyopia and the optical changes in the human crystalline lens with age. Vis Res. 1998;38(2):209–29.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Gunenc U, Oner FH, Tongal S, et al. Effects on visual function of glistenings and folding marks in AcrySof intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001;27(10):1611–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Tognetto D, Toto L, Sanguinetti G, Ravalico G. Glistenings in foldable intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2002;28:1211–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Bautista CP, González DC, Gómez AC. Evolution of visual performance in 70 eyes implanted with the Tecnis(®) ZMB00 multifocal intraocular lens. Clin Ophthalmol. 2012;6:403–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Gil MA, Varon C, Rosello N, et al. Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, subjective quality of vision and quality of life with 4 different multifocal IOLs. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ehmer A, Rabsilber TM, Mannsfeld A, et al.. Influence of different multifocal intraocular lens concepts on retinal stray light parametersDer Ophthalmologe: Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft. 2011;108:952–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Rabsilber TM, Kretz FT, Holzer MP, et al. Bilateral implantation of toric multifocal additive intraocular lenses in pseudophakic eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2012;38:1495–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Friedrich R. Intraocular lens multifocality combined with the compensation for corneal spherical aberration: a new concept of presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens. Case Report Ophthalmol. 2012;3:375–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lubinski W, Gronkowska-Serafin J, Podboraczynska-Jodko K. Clinical outcomes after cataract surgery with implantation of the Tecnis ZMB00 multifocal intraocular lens. Medical Science Monitor: International Medical Journal of Experimental and Clinical Research. 2014;20:1220–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Schmickler S, Bautista CP, Goes F, et al. Clinical evaluation of a multifocal aspheric diffractive intraocular lens. Br J Ophthalmol. 2013;97:1560–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kretz FTA, Gerl M, Gerl R, et al. Clinical evaluation of a new pupil independent diffractive multifocal intraocular lens with a +2.75 D near addition: a European multicentre study. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99:1655–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kretz FT, Koss MJ. Auffartg GU; ZLB00 Study Group–Intermediate and near visual acuity of an aspheric, bifocal, diffractive multifocal intraocular lens with +3.25 D near addition. J Refract Surg. 2015 May;31(5):295–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Cochener B, et al. Clinical outcomes of a new extended range of vision intraocular lens: international multicenter concerto study. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016;42:1268–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Cochener B. TECNIS Symfony® intraocular Lens with a “sweet spot” for tolerance to postoperative residual refractive errors. Open J Ophthalmol. 2017;7:14–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Carones F. Residual astigmatism threshold and patient satisfaction with bifocal, trifocal and extended range of vision intraocular lenses (IOLs). Open J Ophthalmol. 2017;7:1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ferreira TB, Pinheiro J, Zabala L, Ribeiro FJ. Comparative analysis of clinical outcomes of a monofocal and an extended-range-of-vision intraocular lens in eyes with previous myopic laser in situ keratomileusis. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2018;44(2):149–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Yoo Y-S, Whang W-J, et al. Through-focus optical bench performance of extended depth-of-focus and bifocal intraocular lenses compared to a Monofocal Lens. J Refract Surg. 2018;34(4):236–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. BREST University Hospital, Brest, France

    Béatrice Cochener-Lamard

Authors
  1. Béatrice Cochener-Lamard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Béatrice Cochener-Lamard .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Research & Development Department and Department of Cornea Cataract, and Refractive Surgery, VISSUM Corporation and Miguel Hernández University, Alicante, Spain

    Jorge L. Alió

  2. Department of Ophthalmology, Assuta Samson Hospital, Ashdod, Israel

    Joseph Pikkel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Cochener-Lamard, B. (2019). Multifocal Intraocular Lenses: The Johnson and Johnson Family of Lenses. In: Alió, J., Pikkel, J. (eds) Multifocal Intraocular Lenses. Essentials in Ophthalmology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21282-7_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21282-7_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-21281-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-21282-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation