Purpose: To compare the visual outcomes and optical quality of 2 presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses (IOLs) with those of a monofocal IOL.
Settings: Eye Center, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University, School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Design: Prospective cohort study.
Methods: The study included patients who had cataract surgery and were implanted with a Tecnis Symfony Extended Range of Vision (EROV) IOL (ZXR00), a zonal refractive multifocal IOL (Lentis Comfort LS-313 MF15), or a monofocal IOL (Lentis L-313). Postoperative examinations took place at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months and included visual acuity at far, intermediate, and near distances, defocus curves, contrast sensitivity, wavefront aberrations, and modulation transfer function (MTF). Patients completed the Visual Function Index questionnaire (VF-14), the Quality of Vision questionnaire (QoV), and a visual quality self-evaluation.
Results: One hundred thirteen patients were enrolled. The EROV and multifocal IOLs achieved a significantly better range of intermediate vergences (P < .05), better distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (P ≤ .001), higher VF-14 (P < .05) and visual quality self-evaluation scores (P < .05) than the monofocal IOL, but there were no significant differences between the 2 presbyopia-correcting IOLs. The EROV provided lower total wavefront aberrations and better MTF than the multifocal and the monofocal IOLs (P < .05) but demonstrated a worse QoV score (P < .05), especially for severity of halo (P < .01) and starburst (P < .05) symptoms.
Conclusions: Both the Tecnis Symfony ZXR00 and the Lentis Comfort LS-313 MF15 offered excellent visual restoration and stable distance and intermediate visual acuity, good subjective visual function, and good contrast sensitivity. The EROV IOL provided better objective optical quality and more prominent dysphotopsia symptoms than the multifocal IOL.
Visual performance after bilateral implantation of 2 new presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses: Trifocal versus extended range of vision.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017 Jun;43(6):737-747. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.03.037. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2017. PMID: 28732606
Comparative analysis of visual outcomes with 4 intraocular lenses: Monofocal, multifocal, and extended range of vision.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2018 Feb;44(2):156-167. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.11.011. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2018. PMID: 29587972
One-year outcomes with new-generation multifocal intraocular lenses.Ophthalmology. 2008 Sep;115(9):1508-16. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.04.017. Epub 2008 Jun 5. Ophthalmology. 2008. PMID: 18538402 Clinical Trial.
Multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses after cataract extraction.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Sep 12;(9):CD003169. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003169.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012. PMID: 22972061 Updated. Review.
Accommodative intraocular lens versus standard monofocal intraocular lens implantation in cataract surgery.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 May 1;(5):CD009667. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009667.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014. PMID: 24788900 Review.
Cited by 1 article
Comparing Visual Acuity, Low Contrast Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity After Trifocal Toric and Extended Depth of Focus Toric Intraocular Lens Implantation.Clin Ophthalmol. 2020 Apr 22;14:1071-1078. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S253250. eCollection 2020. Clin Ophthalmol. 2020. PMID: 32368005 Free PMC article.