Visual Performance With Bifocal and Trifocal Diffractive Intraocular Lenses: A Prospective Three-Armed Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trial
- 1 October 2017
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SLACK, Inc. in Journal of Refractive Surgery
- Vol. 33 (10), 655-662
- https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597x-20170504-04
Abstract
To evaluate and compare quality of vision and reading performance outcomes after implantation of bifocal refractive-diffractive, bifocal apodized diffractive, or trifocal diffractive-refractive intraocular lenses (IOLs). This randomized, prospective, three-armed multicenter (Spain, Germany, and France) trial included 104 eyes of 52 patients (mean age: 63.2 ± 7.7 years). Patients underwent cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of either AT LISA 809M (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany: AT LISA group, 38 eyes), AT LISA tri 839MP (Carl Zeiss Meditec: AT LISA tri group, 32 eyes), or ReSTOR SN6AD1 (Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Fort Worth, TX: ReSTOR group, 34 eyes) IOLs. Visual and refractive outcomes, depth of focus, and reading performance were evaluated at 1, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. The AT LISA tri group showed significantly better 12-month uncorrected (UIVA) and binocular distance-corrected (DCIVA) intermediate visual acuity (P ≤ .016) than the AT LISA group. The AT LISA tri group showed a significantly better 3-month UIVA compared to the ReSTOR group (P = .042). Binocular uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuities were not significantly different among groups (P ≥ .092) at the 12-month follow-up. A total of 85.3%, 90.0%, and 78.1% of eyes had a spherical equivalent within ±0.50 D in the AT LISA, AT LISA tri, and ReSTOR groups, respectively, at 12 months (P = .038). No statistically significant differences between the trifocal and bifocal groups were detected for reading performance (P ≥ .055). The trifocal diffractive-refractive IOL provides enhanced intermediate visual restoration compared to bifocal diffractive-refractive or apodized diffractive IOLs. The addition of an intermediate focal point did not deteriorate far or near vision. A comparable reading performance was maintained with the trifocal lens. [J Refract Surg. 2017;33(10):655-662.].Keywords
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Stability of a Novel Intraocular Lens Design: Comparison of Two Trifocal LensesJournal of Refractive Surgery, 2016
- Evaluation of visual outcomes and patient satisfaction after implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lensJournal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery, 2016
- Visual Outcomes, Patient Satisfaction and Spectacle Independence with a Trifocal Diffractive Intraocular LensKorean Journal of Ophthalmology, 2016
- Quality of Vision after Bilateral Multifocal Intraocular Lens ImplantationOphthalmology, 2014
- Comparative Analysis of the Visual Performance After Cataract Surgery With Implantation of a Bifocal or Trifocal Diffractive IOLJournal of Refractive Surgery, 2014
- Clinical Outcomes with a New Trifocal Intraocular LensEuropean Journal of Ophthalmology, 2014
- Comparison of Far and near Contrast Sensitivity in Patients Symmetrically Implanted with Multifocal and Monofocal IolsEuropean Journal of Ophthalmology, 2013
- Optical performance after bilateral implantation of apodized aspheric diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses with +3.00‐D addition powerActa Ophthalmologica, 2012
- Comparison of a new-generation sectorial addition multifocal intraocular lens and a diffractive apodized multifocal intraocular lensJournal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery, 2011
- Visual and Optical Performance With Two Different Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lenses Compared to a Monofocal LensJournal of Refractive Surgery, 2011