Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2017 Mar 28:7:45337.
doi: 10.1038/srep45337.

Clinical comparison of patient outcomes following implantation of trifocal or bifocal intraocular lenses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Clinical comparison of patient outcomes following implantation of trifocal or bifocal intraocular lenses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Zeren Shen et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

To assess the visual effects of trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) compared to bifocal IOLs in cataract surgery, a meta-analysis of prospective comparative clinical trials (including 4 randomized controlled trials and 4 cohorts) was conducted. The defocus curves showed a better distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (VA) for the trifocal group (MD -0.07; 95% CI, -0.10 to -0.05; p < 0.00001), while the VA outcomes showed no significant difference in distance VA (MD -0.03; 95% CI, -0.06 to 0.01; p = 0.13 for uncorrected distance VA and MD -0.00; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.01; p = 0.78 for distance-corrected distance VA), near VA (MD -0.01; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.04; p = 0.68 for uncorrected near VA and MD -0.01; 95% CI, -0.06 to 0.04; p = 0.66 for distance-corrected near VA) or refraction between the two groups. Contrast sensitivity and subjective visual quality yielded less conclusive results. Overall, a patient may achieve better intermediate VA with a trifocal IOL than with a bifocal IOL without any adverse effect on distance or near VA. The findings on contrast sensitivity and subjective visual quality were heterogeneous, with no clear results favoring either option.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Flow chart showing selection of articles.
IOL = intraocular lens; RCTs = randomized controlled trials.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Pooled mean differences (MDs) for uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) and distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) in logMAR by meta-analysis.
(a) Forest plot showing the MD of UDVA comparing trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) with bifocal IOL postoperatively (only for RCTs). (b) Forest plot showing MD of CDVA comparing trifocal IOL with bifocal IOL postoperatively (only for RCTs). (c) Forest plot showing the MD of UNVA comparing trifocal IOL with bifocal IOL postoperatively. (d) Forest plot showing the MD of DCNVA comparing trifocal IOL with bifocal IOL postoperatively.

References

    1. Gundersen K. G. & Potvin R. Comparison of visual outcomes and subjective visual quality after bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens and blended implantation of apodized diffractive bifocal intraocular lenses. Clin Ophthalmol. 10, 805–811 (2016). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jonker S. M. et al.. Comparison of a trifocal intraocular lens with a +3.0 D bifocal IOL: results of a prospective randomized clinical trial. J Cataract Refract Surg. 41, 1631–1640 (2015). - PubMed
    1. Bilbao-Calabuig R. et al.. Comparison between mix-and-match implantation of bifocal intraocular lenses and bilateral implantation of trifocal intraocular lenses. J Refract Surg. 32, 659–663 (2016). - PubMed
    1. Cochener B. Prospective clinical comparison of patient outcomes following implantation of trifocal or bifocal intraocular lenses. J Refract Surg. 32, 146–151 (2016). - PubMed
    1. Gundersen K. G. & Potvin R. Comparison of visual outcomes after implantation of diffractive trifocal toric intraocular lens and a diffractive apodized bifocal toric intraocular lens. Clin Ophthalmol. 10, 455–461 (2016). - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources