Purpose: To evaluate the test–retest reproducibility of a novel microperimeter with fundus image tracking (MP3, Nidek Co, Japan) in healthy subjects and patients with macular disease. Methods: Ten healthy subjects and 20 patients suffering from range of macular diseases were included. After training measurements, two additional microperimetry measurements were scheduled. Test–retest reproducibility was assessed for mean retinal sensitivity, pointwise sensitivity, and deep scotoma size using the coefficient of repeatability and Bland-Altman diagrams. In addition, in a subgroup of patients microperimetry was compared with conventional perimetry. Results: Average differences in mean retinal sensitivity between the two study measurements were 0.26 ± 1.7 dB (median 0 dB; interquartile range [IQR] −1 to 1) for the healthy and 0.36 ± 2.5 dB (median 0 dB; IQR −1 to 2) for the macular patient group. Coefficients of repeatability for mean retinal sensitivity and pointwise retinal sensitivity were 1.2 and 3.3 dB for the healthy subjects and 1.6 and 5.0 dB for the macular disease patients, respectively. Absolute agreement in deep scotoma size between both study days was found in 79.9% of the test loci. Conclusion: The microperimeter MP3 shows an adequate test–retest reproducibility for mean retinal sensitivity, pointwise retinal sensitivity, and deep scotoma size in healthy subjects and patients suffering from macular disease. Furthermore, reproducibility of microperimetry is higher than conventional perimetry. Translational Relevance: Reproducibility is an important measure for each diagnostic device. Especially in a clinical setting high reproducibility set the basis to achieve reliable results using the specific device. Therefore, assessment of the reproducibility is of eminent importance to interpret the findings of future studies.

Aim: To compare the repeatability of 2 swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) biometers, IOLMaster 700 (biometer A, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) and ANTERION (biometer B, Heidelberg Engineering GmbH) and 1 optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR) device (biometer C, LENSTAR, LS900; Haag-Streit AG). Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, Hanusch Hospital, Vienna Institute for Research in Ocular Surgery—Karl Landsteiner Institute, Vienna, Austria. Design: Prospective study that included patients scheduled for cataract surgery. Method: Three consecutive measurements were performed with 2 SS-OCT devices and 1 OLCR device. The repeatability of the following biometry variables was compared: keratometry, central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), and axial eye length (AL). To assess the repeatability of each parameter, the within-subject SD (S_w) and coefficient of variation (CoV) were calculated. Result: Fifty eyes of 50 patients were included. The CoV values were below 0.5 for all variables, except for ACD and LT for biometer C. The S_w values for mean keratometry were 0.018 for biometer A, 0.083 for biometer B, and 0.137 for biometer C. For the ACD, the S_w values were 0.039 and 0.004 for biometer A and biometer B, respectively, and 0.134 for biometer C. For the AL, the values were 0.006 for biometer A, 0.008 for biometer B, and 0.012 for biometer C. Conclusions: All biometry devices included in the analysis presented a high repeatability. The SS-OCT devices showed a higher repeatability performance compared with the OLCR device.

A novel non-iterative digital adaptive optics technique is presented in which the wavefront error is calculated using the phase difference between the pupil field and its digital copies translated by a pixel along the horizontal and vertical direction in the pupil plane. This method provides slope data per pixel, thus can generate > 50k local slope data samples for a circular pupil of diameter 256 pixels with high accuracy and dynamic range. It offers more than 12x faster computational speed in comparison to the sub-aperture based digital adaptive optics method. Furthermore, it is independent of any system parameters, the light distribution in the pupil plane, or the intensity of the image. The technique is useful in applications such as interferometric or digital holography based microscopy, metrology, and as digital wavefront sensor in adaptive optics, where focusing of light in the sample is involved that creates a guide star or where the sample itself exhibits guide star-like structures. This technique is implemented in a point scanning swept-source OCT at 1060 nm, and a large wavefront error with a peak to valley of 20 radians and root mean square error of 0.71 waves is detected and corrected in case of a micro-beads phantom sample. Also, human photoreceptor images are recovered from aberrated retinal OCT volumes acquired at eccentricities of 2 and 2.5 degrees from the fovea in vivo.

Purpose: Internal limiting membrane (ILM) flap transposition in surgical repair of macular holes represents a new technique offering good anatomical success rates with large macular holes. The aim of the study was to examine microperimetric outcomes 1 year after ILM flap transposition for surgical repair of macular holes. Methods: Patients with idi­opathic macular holes scheduled for 23-G pars plana vitrectomy with ILM peeling, ILM flap transposition, and SF₆ tamponade were examined in a prospective case series. Distance corrected visual acuity (DCVA), optical coherence tomography, and microperimetry were measured before and 1 year after surgery. Results: In all eyes, closure of the macular hole could be achieved. While foveal sensitivity improved in 71%, perifoveal sensitivity improved in 86% of the cases. DCVA improved in 83% and was unchanged in 17% of the cases. Conclusions: Beside visual acuity, foveal and perifoveal macular sensitivity improved, underlining the functional success of surgery after ILM peeling with ILM flap transposition.

Introduction: Central and paracentral retinal function is often compromised in various retinal diseases. In these conditions, microperimetry is an important tool for assessing retinal sensitivity values. As retinal diseases are prevalent among the elderly, cataract often coexists. This study investigates the effect of cataract surgery on retinal sensitivity in patients with cataract without retinal disease. Material and Methods: A total of 30 patients already scheduled for cataract surgery were enrolled and microperimetry and visual acuity evaluation was performed before and after cataract extraction. The patients were allocated to 1 of 3 study groups in accordance with the main cataract subtype: nuclear, cortical, or posterior subcapsular (PSC) cataract. Results: Visual acuity increased significantly after cataract surgery (from 0.34 to 0.00 logMar, p < 0.001, paired t test). Similarly, median retinal sensitivity increased significantly from 23 dB (IQR 21–25 dB) to 27 dB (IQR 25.75–28 dB) (p < 0.001, Wilcoxon test). The increase of retinal sensitivity after cataract surgery was highest in the PSC cataract group. Conclusion: This study showed an increase in retinal sensitivity values after cataract removal, especially in the PSC group. Therefore, coexisting cataract should be considered when interpreting microperimetry results.

To compare interindividual differences in visual performance of an advanced monofocal with a nondiffractive extended depth of focus intraocular lens (IOL) using a mini-monovision approach. Single-center, randomized, controlled, double-masked study. In total, 48 patients (96 eyes) with bilateral age-related cataract were enrolled. One group received an advanced monofocal IOL RAO200E (RayOne EMV; Rayner) and the other group a non-diffractive extended depth of focus IOL DFT015 (Acrysof IQ Vivity; Alcon) in both eyes. Target refraction for both groups was mini-monovision. After 3 months, monocular and binocular distance corrected and uncorrected distance (CDVA/UDVA), intermediate (DCIVA/UIVA), and near visual acuity (DCNVA/UNVA); contrast sensitivity; binocular defocus curves; halometry; and Quality of Vision questionnaire scores were compared. Binocular mean CDVA, DCIVA at 66 cm, and DCNVA at 40 cm were -0.10±0.10, 0.15±0.11, and 0.32±0.16 logMAR for the RAO200E and -0.10±0.10, 0.12±0.10, and 0.27±0.16 logMAR for the DFT015, respectively, with no significant difference. A significant difference could be shown for the dominant eye in monocular DCIVA and DCNVA and for the dominant and nondominant eye in monocular UNVA, with 0.28±0.14, 0.48±0.22, 0.46±0.21, and 0.41±0.20 logMAR for the RAO200E and 0.14±0.10 (P = .023), 0.35±0.16 (P = .008), 0.30±0.14 (P = .001), and 0.21±0.10 (P = .003) logMAR for the DFT015, respectively. Significantly smaller halo size in the RAO200E group and significantly better distance-corrected defocus curve at -2.5 (P = .031), -2.0 (P = .03), and -1 diopters (P = .03) of defocus in the DFT015 group could be shown. Distance corrected or uncorrected binocular visual acuity for far, intermediate, and near distance between the advanced monofocal IOL RAO200E and the non-diffractive extended depth of focus IOL DFT015, when compared in a mini-monovision setting, showed no significant differences.