Comparison of postoperative visual performance between bifocal and trifocal intraocular Lens based on randomized controlled trails: a meta-analysis
- PMID: 30871503
- PMCID: PMC6419463
- DOI: 10.1186/s12886-019-1078-1
Comparison of postoperative visual performance between bifocal and trifocal intraocular Lens based on randomized controlled trails: a meta-analysis
Abstract
Background: To compare the clinical performance of bifocal and trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) in cataract surgery, a meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials was conducted.
Methods: A comprehensive literature retrieval of PubMed, Science Direct and EMBASE was performed in this systematic review. Clinical outcomes included visual acuity (VA), contrast sensitivity (CS), spectacle independence, postoperative refraction and surgical satisfaction.
Results: There were 8 RCTs included in this study. The difference of uncorrected near VA (UNVA) between the bifocal IOLs and trifocal IOLs had no significance [MD = 0.02, 95%CI: (- 0.03,0.06)]. There was no significant difference in the distant-corrected near VA (DCNVA) with MD of 0.04 [95%CI (- 0.02, 0.10)]. Compared with trifocal group, the uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) [MD = 0.09,95%CI:(0.01,0.17)] was significantly worse in the bifocal group. No difference was found in distance-corrected intermediate VA (DCIVA) [MD = 0.09, 95%CI: (- 0.04, 0.23)] between two groups. Analysis on AT LISA subgroup indicated the bifocal group had worse intermediate VA than trifocal group (AT LISA tri 839 M) [MD = 0.18, 95%CI: (0.12, 0.24) for UIVA and MD = 0.19, 95%CI: (0.13, 0.25) for DCIVA]. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in the uncorrected distance VA (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) [MD = 0.01, 95%CI: (- 0.01,0.04) for UDVA; MD = 0.00, 95%CI: (- 0.01,0.01) for CDVA]. The postoperative refraction of bifocal group was similar to that of trifocal group [MD = -0.08, 95% CI: (- 0.19, 0.03) for spherical equivalent; MD = -0.09, 95%CI: (- 0.21, 0.03) for cylinder; MD = -0.09, 95% CI: (- 0.27, 0.08) for sphere]. No difference was found for spectacle independence, posterior capsular opacification (PCO) incidence and patient satisfaction between bifocal IOLs and trifocal IOLs. [RR = 0.89, 95% CI: (0.71, 1.12) for spectacle independence; RR = 1.81, 95% CI: (0.50, 6.54) for PCO incidence; RR = 0.98, 5% CI: (0.86, 1.12) for patient satisfaction].
Conclusion: Patients receiving trifocal IOLs, especially AT LISA tri 839 M, have a better intermediate VA than those receiving bifocal IOLs. Near and distance visual performance, spectacle independence, postoperative refraction and surgical satisfaction of bifocal IOLs were similar to those of trifocal IOLs.
Keywords: Bifocal; Cataract surgery; IOLs; Intraocular lenses; Meta-analysis; Randomized; Trifocal.
Conflict of interest statement
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable
Consent for publication
Not applicable
Competing interests
No authors have a financial and proprietary interest in any material and method mentioned. The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Figures


















Similar articles
-
Trifocal intraocular lenses versus bifocal intraocular lenses after cataract extraction among participants with presbyopia.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jun 18;6(6):CD012648. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012648.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Jan 27;1:CD012648. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012648.pub3. PMID: 32584432 Free PMC article. Updated.
-
Comparison of clinical performance between trifocal and bifocal intraocular lenses: A meta-analysis.PLoS One. 2017 Oct 26;12(10):e0186522. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186522. eCollection 2017. PLoS One. 2017. PMID: 29073156 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of Reading Speed after Bilateral Bifocal and Trifocal Intraocular Lens Implantation.Korean J Ophthalmol. 2018 Apr;32(2):77-82. doi: 10.3341/kjo.2017.0057. Epub 2018 Mar 19. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2018. PMID: 29560618 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of a trifocal intraocular lens with a +3.0 D bifocal IOL: results of a prospective randomized clinical trial.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015 Aug;41(8):1631-40. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.08.011. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015. PMID: 26432120 Clinical Trial.
-
Comparative efficacy and safety of all kinds of intraocular lenses in presbyopia-correcting cataract surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC Ophthalmol. 2024 Apr 16;24(1):172. doi: 10.1186/s12886-024-03446-1. BMC Ophthalmol. 2024. PMID: 38627651 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Depth of field and visual performance after implantation of a new hydrophobic trifocal intraocular lens.BMC Ophthalmol. 2022 May 31;22(1):240. doi: 10.1186/s12886-022-02462-3. BMC Ophthalmol. 2022. PMID: 35642049 Free PMC article.
-
Trifocal intraocular lenses versus bifocal intraocular lenses after cataract extraction among participants with presbyopia.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jun 18;6(6):CD012648. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012648.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Jan 27;1:CD012648. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012648.pub3. PMID: 32584432 Free PMC article. Updated.
-
Comparative Efficacy Between Trifocal and Bifocal Intraocular Lens Among Patients Undergoing Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Sep 30;8:647268. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2021.647268. eCollection 2021. Front Med (Lausanne). 2021. PMID: 34660614 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction with a New Diffractive-Refractive Trifocal Intraocular Lens - A 12 Month Prospective Study.Clin Ophthalmol. 2021 Aug 3;15:3247-3257. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S320202. eCollection 2021. Clin Ophthalmol. 2021. PMID: 34376969 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical Outcomes of a Bi-Aspheric Trifocal Diffractive Intraocular Lens.Clin Ophthalmol. 2024 Jan 4;18:27-40. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S445128. eCollection 2024. Clin Ophthalmol. 2024. PMID: 38192579 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
References
-
- Blindness: vision 2020 - the global initiative for the elimination of avoidable blindness. https://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs213/en/. Accessed 2 May 2018.
-
- Cheng JW, Cheng SW, Cai JP, Li Y, Wei RL. The prevalence of visual impairment in older adults in mainland China: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmic Res. 2013;49(1):1–10. - PubMed
-
- YB L, DS F, TY W, SY Z, LP S, JJ W, XR D, XH Y, FH W, Q Z, et al. Prevalence and causes of low vision and blindness in a rural chinese adult population: the Handan eye study. Ophthalmology. 2008;115(11):1965–1972. - PubMed
-
- Tan X, Lin H, Li YT, Huang L, Zhu Y, Ni Y, Huang WY, Liu Y. Cataract screening in a rural area of southern China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2016;2016:S53.
-
- Kohnen T. How far we have come: from Ridley's first intraocular lens to modern IOL technology. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2009;35(12):2039. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources