Comparison of bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus lenses and a blend approach of extended depth of focus lenses and bifocal lenses in cataract patients
- PMID: 37990306
- PMCID: PMC10664382
- DOI: 10.1186/s12886-023-03228-1
Comparison of bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus lenses and a blend approach of extended depth of focus lenses and bifocal lenses in cataract patients
Abstract
Background: To compare the visual outcomes, spectacle independent rate and stereopsis in patients who underwent bilateral implantation of extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL), or a blend approach of EDOF and bifocal IOL.
Methods: A total of 60 cataract patients, who were scheduled for phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation in both eyes in West China Hospital of Sichuan University, were enrolled and divided into Micro monovision group(-0.5D~-1.0D), Non-micro monovision group (< 0.5D) with Symfony IOL, and Mixed group with Symfony and ZMB00 IOLs. Three months postoperatively, we compared the visual acuity, modulation transfer function (MTF), defocus curve, stereopsis, spectacle independence, and photic phenomena among the three groups.
Results: Compared to the Non-micro monovision group (UNVA: 0.07 ± 0.04), Micro monovision group (UNVA: 0.00 ± 0.07, P < 0.001) and Mixed group (UNVA: -0.02 ± 0.06, P < 0.001) showed improvement in binocular uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA). Additionally, Mixed group exhibited lower MTF10 (MTF10: 0.38 ± 0.24) and point spread function (PSF: 0.192 ± 0.269) results in their non-dominant eye compared to both Micro monovision group (MTF10: 0.56 ± 0.21, P = 0.027; PSF: 0.417 ± 0.282, P = 0.034) and Non-micro monovision group (MTF10: 0.55 ± 0.19, P = 0.038; PSF: 0.408 ± 0.285, P = 0.003). Spectacle independence for near vision were higher in both the Micro monovision (45%) and Mixed (55%) group compared to the Non-micro monovision group (40%). The Mixed group also reported higher incidence of photic phenomena (25%). However, there were no significant differences in stereoscopic function among the three groups.
Conclusion: Both micro monovision and mix-and-match methods can help patients to obtain better visual outcomes at different distances. Mix-and-match method has better near visual acuity, while micro monovision method has better intermediate visual acuity. Non-micro monovision methods will affect patients' near vision outcomes. Binocularly implanted EDOF IOL has better contrast sensitivity.
Clinical trial registration: Registration date:11/07/2023.
Trial registration number: ChiCTR2300073433.
Trial registry: West China Hospital of Sichuan University retrospectively registered.
Keywords: Blend; Cataract; Micro monovision; Presbyopia corrected intraocular lens.
© 2023. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Neurosensory binocular vision after bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus intraocular lens with micro-monovision: a prospective cohort study.BMC Ophthalmol. 2025 May 19;25(1):294. doi: 10.1186/s12886-025-04125-5. BMC Ophthalmol. 2025. PMID: 40389895 Free PMC article.
-
Outcome of a Mix-and-Match Approach with a Monofocal Aspherical and a Bifocal Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lens to Achieve Extended Monovision in Cataract Patients.Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2025 Apr;242(4):372-378. doi: 10.1055/a-2479-9041. Epub 2025 Jan 13. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2025. PMID: 39805287 English.
-
Comparisons of visual outcomes between bilateral implantation and mix-and-match implantation of three types intraocular lenses.Int Ophthalmol. 2023 Apr;43(4):1143-1152. doi: 10.1007/s10792-022-02513-0. Epub 2022 Sep 20. Int Ophthalmol. 2023. PMID: 36125586
-
Outcomes of mini-monovision with monofocal, enhanced monofocal and extended depth-of-focus intraocular lenses.Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Feb 21;12:1522383. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1522383. eCollection 2025. Front Med (Lausanne). 2025. PMID: 40061383 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The Quest for Spectacle Independence: A Comparison of Multifocal Intraocular Lens Implants and Pseudophakic Monovision for Patients with Presbyopia.Semin Ophthalmol. 2017;32(1):111-115. doi: 10.1080/08820538.2016.1228400. Epub 2016 Oct 28. Semin Ophthalmol. 2017. PMID: 27792408 Review.
Cited by
-
Effect of crystalline lens decentration and tilt on visual performance in eyes implanted with bifocal or extended depth of focus intraocular lenses.BMC Ophthalmol. 2025 Feb 3;25(1):58. doi: 10.1186/s12886-025-03884-5. BMC Ophthalmol. 2025. PMID: 39901088 Free PMC article.
-
Pearls on choosing presbyopia correction IOLs.Indian J Ophthalmol. 2024 Sep 1;72(9):1233-1235. doi: 10.4103/IJO.IJO_1643_24. Epub 2024 Aug 23. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2024. PMID: 39185825 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Efficacy and comfort following the implantation of extended depth of focus, multifocal, and monofocal intraocular lenses in cataract patients.BMC Ophthalmol. 2024 Sep 27;24(1):423. doi: 10.1186/s12886-024-03685-2. BMC Ophthalmol. 2024. PMID: 39334046 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Mix-and-Match Implantation of a Trifocal and Non-Diffractive Extended Depth of Focus IOL.Clin Ophthalmol. 2025 Aug 9;19:2625-2635. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S533091. eCollection 2025. Clin Ophthalmol. 2025. PMID: 40808914 Free PMC article.
-
Long-term Results after Bilateral Implantation of Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses with Mini-Monovision.Korean J Ophthalmol. 2024 Apr;38(2):129-136. doi: 10.3341/kjo.2023.0139. Epub 2024 Feb 27. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2024. PMID: 38414249 Free PMC article.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous