April 2009
Volume 50, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2009
In-vivo Optical Quality of the Synchrony® Accommodating IOL
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • L. G. Vargas
    Visiogen, Irvine, California
  • S. Kasthurirangan
    Visiogen, Irvine, California
  • G. Lau
    Visiogen, Irvine, California
  • S. Evans
    Visiogen, Irvine, California
  • V. Portney
    Visiogen, Irvine, California
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  L.G. Vargas, Visiogen, E; S. Kasthurirangan, Visiogen, E; G. Lau, Visiogen, E; S. Evans, Visiogen, E; V. Portney, Visiogen, C.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2009, Vol.50, 5606. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      L. G. Vargas, S. Kasthurirangan, G. Lau, S. Evans, V. Portney; In-vivo Optical Quality of the Synchrony® Accommodating IOL. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2009;50(13):5606.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose: : Synchrony dual optic accommodating IOL has a high power anterior optic (32D) and a posterior negative optic for emmetropia. The constant high powered anterior optic provides greater accommodation for the same amount of movement as a single optic IOL and equal accommodative benefit across IOL powers. The purpose of the study is to evaluate the optical quality of the Synchrony IOL by comparing objective aberration and MTF measurements and subjective contrast sensitivity in pseudophakic eyes with the Synchrony or a standard monofocal IOL.

Methods: : Monocular iTrace aberrometry (Tracey Technologies, Houston, TX) was performed under cycloplegia in 15 subjects (30 eyes) with a standard monofocal IOL and 16 subjects (32 eyes) with the Synchrony Dual Optic Accommodating IOL at least one year after cataract surgery. Zernike coefficients provided by iTrace was exported to custom Matlab software for calculating MTF up to 30 cycles/degree in 5 cyc/deg steps. All objective measurements were performed for a 3 mm pupil. Monocular mesopic contrast sensitivity was measured in 29 eyes with Synchrony and 35 eyes with standard monofocal IOL with Optec 6500 Vision Tester (Stereo Optical Co., Chicago, IL). Average higher order Zernike aberrations (HOA), best focus MTF and mesopic contrast sensitivity (MCS) were compared between Synchrony and control eyes.

Results: : Cycloplegic Zernike terms up to the 4th order were not different between Synchrony and control IOLs except for spherical aberration (0.01 microns for a 3 mm pupil, p < 0.01). Differences in average best focus MTF for Synchrony and control were not greater than 10% at any spatial frequency. MCS without glare was not different between Synchrony and control eyes at all spatial frequencies. MCS with glare at 1.5 cpd and 3 cpd for the Synchrony lens group was statistically significantly better than that for the control lens group (p<0.05, Wilcox Rank Sum Test), and similar between both at 6, 12 and 18 cpd.

Conclusions: : The retinal image quality provided by Synchrony Dual Optic Accommodating IOL is equal or better than standard monofocal IOLs whether tested objectively or subjectively.

Keywords: intraocular lens • accomodation • aberrations 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.