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
. 2017 Jun;43(6):737-747.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.03.037.

Visual performance after bilateral implantation of 2 new presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses: Trifocal versus extended range of vision

Affiliations

Visual performance after bilateral implantation of 2 new presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses: Trifocal versus extended range of vision

Gaspare Monaco et al. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017 Jun.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the visual outcomes and quality of vision of 2 new diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with those of a monofocal IOL.

Setting: Fatebenefratelli e Oftalmico Hospital, Milan, Italy.

Design: Prospective case series.

Methods: Patients had bilateral cataract surgery with implantation of a trifocal IOL (Panoptix), an extended-range-of-vision IOL (Symfony), or a monofocal IOL (SN60WF). Postoperative examinations included assessing distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity; binocular defocus; intraocular and total aberrations; point-spread function (PSF); modulation transfer function (MTF); retinal straylight; and quality-of-vision (QoV) and spectacle-dependence questionnaires.

Results: Seventy-six patients (152 eyes) were assessed for study eligibility. Twenty patients (40 eyes) in each arm of the study (60 patients, 120 eyes) completed the outcome assessment. At the 4-month follow-up, the trifocal group had significantly better near visual acuity than the extended-range-of-vision group (P = .005). The defocus curve showed the trifocal IOL had better intermediate/near performance than the extended-range-of-vision IOL and both multifocal IOLs performed better than the monofocal IOL. Intragroup comparison of the total higher-order aberrations, PSF, MTF, and retinal straylight were not statistically different. The QoV questionnaire results showed no differences in dysphotopsia between the multifocal IOL groups; however, the results were significantly higher than in the monofocal IOL group.

Conclusions: Both multifocal IOLs seemed to be good options for patients with intermediate-vision requirements, whereas the trifocal IOL might be better for patients with near-vision requirements. The significant perception of visual side effects indicates that patients still must be counseled about these effects before a multifocal IOL is implanted.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources