Abstract: Cataract surgery is one of the most commonly performed surgeries among the elderly today. The volume of cataract surgeries has dramatically increased in the past few decades due to technological advancements leading to decreased morbidity, better overall outcomes, and increased expectation for correction of refractive error and spectacle independence after cataract surgery. The number of cataract surgeries is expected to continue to rise with the increase of the elderly population. Thus, accurate predictions of intraocular lens (IOL) power and the ability to correct for any postoperative refractive errors are critical. Despite the improved ability of cataract surgeons to accurately calculate IOL power, postoperative refractive errors still do occur due to various reasons such as imperfect preoperative measurements, toric-lens misalignment, and existing or surgically-induced astigmatism. The aim of this article is to review the various surgical options, including intraocular and corneal refractive surgical approaches, to correct post-operative refractive errors after cataract surgery.

Abstract: In this review, recent studies regarding riboflavin-ultraviolet A (UVA) collagen cross-linking for the treatment of acanthamoeba keratitis (AK) were reviewed. English written studies about acanthamoeba, keratitis, riboflavin and collagen cross-linking were retrieved from PubMed search engine (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed). Although there were significant numbers of cases reporting the effectiveness of riboflavin-UVA collagen cross-linking in AK, experimental studies (in vivo and in vitro) failed to verify amoebicidal or cysticidal effect of riboflavin-UVA collagen cross-linking. In conclusion, the efficacy of riboflavin-UVA collagen cross-linking for the treatment of AK is still debatable. It is necessary to conduct a prospective case-control study for clear guidance for clinicians.

Abstract: Advances in intraocular lens (IOL) design have rendered cataract surgery a refractive procedure. Newer IOL types include bifocal, trifocal and extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOLs. Their basic difference nestles in the number of focal points that each lens provides, which in turn leads to different visual outcomes. Familiarity of surgeons with the various characteristics of each lens is of utmost importance for accurate IOL selection to match each patient’s needs. In this review, we aim to compare the clinical outcomes after implantation of multifocal and EDOF IOLs in terms of distance, intermediate and near vision, contrast sensitivity, and reading performance. Finally, we discuss the defocus curve and the optical and photic phenomena associated with each type of IOL.