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
. 2021 Jan;9(2):144.
doi: 10.21037/atm-20-7777.

Comparison of the visual performance between Oculentis MF30 and Tecnis ZMB00 multifocal intraocular lenses

Lingying Ye  1 , Tianyu Chen  2 , Zhixiang Hu  2 , Qingwen Yang  1 , Qiudong Su  1 , Jin Li  1
Affiliations

Comparison of the visual performance between Oculentis MF30 and Tecnis ZMB00 multifocal intraocular lenses

Lingying Ye et al. Ann Transl Med. 2021 Jan.

Abstract

Background: To compare the visual performance of MF30 asymmetric refractive multifocal intraocular lenses (MIOLs) with ZMB00 all optic zone diffractive MIOLs.

Methods: This is a prospective study. Patients that underwent phacoemulsification were divided into two groups according to the type of MIOLs used: 35 patients were implanted with asymmetric refractive MIOLs and 35 patients with all optic zone diffractive MIOLs. Visual acuity (VA), refraction, defocus curves, objective optical quality, and a questionnaire evaluating quality of life were measured at 3 months postoperatively.

Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups in uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA), or distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA). However, the uncorrected intermediate VA was 0.24±0.10 in the refractive group and 0.31±0.13 in the diffractive group (P<0.05), and the distance-corrected intermediate VA was 0.22±0.09 in the refractive group and 0.31±0.14 in the diffractive group (P<0.05). Defocus curves showed two peaks of maximum vision in both groups. However, the curve between the two peaks in the refractive group was smoother than that of the diffractive group. The modulated transfer function cut-off frequency was 22.74±12.29 c/d in the refractive group and 30.50±10.04 c/d in the diffractive group (P<0.05). The Optical Quality Analysis System (OQAS) values 100% (OV100%) was 0.75±0.41 in the refractive group and 1.02±0.34 in the diffractive group (P<0.05), while the OV20% was 0.52±0.34 in the refractive group and 0.71±0.25 in the diffractive group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in overall satisfaction, spectacle independence ratio, or visual interference phenomenon.

Conclusions: Both MIOLs achieve good VA at distance and near vision. Oculentis MF30 showed better intermediate VA, and Tecnis ZMB00 appears to have better objective visual quality.

Trial registration: NCT02234635 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Keywords: Asymmetric; diffractive; multifocal intraocular lens; refractive; visual quality.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-7777). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Two types of multifocal IOLs. (A) Lentis Mplus LS-313 MF30 multifocal IOL; (B) ZMB00 multifocal IOL. IOL, intraocular lens.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Ray tracing diagrams show the focal depth of each MIOL. (A) Lentis Mplus LS-313 MF30 multifocal IOL; (B) ZMB00 multifocal IOL. MIOL, multifocal intraocular lens; IOL, intraocular lens.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Defocusing curves of refractive and diffractive groups.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Yamauchi T, Tabuchi H, Takase K, et al. Comparison of visual performance of multifocal intraocular lenses with same material monofocal intraocular lenses. PLoS One 2013;8:e68236. 10.1371/journal.pone.0068236 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Alio JL, Plaza-Puche AB, Javaloy J, et al. Comparison of the visual and intraocular optical performance of a refractive multifocal IOL with rotational asymmetry and an apodized diffractive multifocal IOL. J Refract Surg 2012;28:100-5. 10.3928/1081597X-20120110-01 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Alfonso JF, Fernandez-Vega L, Blazquez JI, et al. Visual function comparison of 2 aspheric multifocal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 2012;38:242-8. 10.1016/j.jcrs.2011.08.034 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gatinel D, Houbrechts Y. Comparison of bifocal and trifocal diffractive and refractive intraocular lenses using an optical bench. J Cataract Refract Surg 2013;39:1093-9. 10.1016/j.jcrs.2013.01.048 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chen T, Yu F, Lin H, et al. Objective and subjective visual quality after implantation of all optic zone diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses: a prospective, case-control observational study. Br J Ophthalmol 2016;100:1530-5. 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307135 - DOI - PubMed

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources