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
Clinical Trial
. 2023 Nov 21;23(1):476.
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

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

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

Tianxu Xiong et al. BMC Ophthalmol. .

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Three months post-op defocus curves (A: micro monovision group, B: non-micro monovision group, C: mixed group, D: Comparison of bilateral defocus curve)

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lee CM, Afshari NA. The global state of cataract blindness. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2017;28(1):98–103. doi: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000340. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Medical Advisory Secretariat Intraocular lenses for the treatment of age-related cataracts: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2009;9(15):1–62. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zhong Y, Wang K, Yu X, Liu X, Yao K. Comparison of trifocal or hybrid multifocal-extended depth of focus intraocular lenses: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep-uk. 2021;11(1):6699. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-86222-1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cochener B, Boutillier G, Lamard M, Auberger-Zagnoli C. A comparative evaluation of a New Generation of Diffractive Trifocal and Extended depth of Focus intraocular lenses. J Refract Surg. 2018;34(8):507–14. doi: 10.3928/1081597X-20180530-02. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tanabe H, Tabuchi H, Shojo T, Yamauchi T, Takase K. Comparison of visual performance between monofocal and multifocal intraocular lenses of the same material and basic design. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):15490. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-72473-x. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types