Jul 2026· Korean Journal of Ophthalmology· Vol 40, pp. 433 - 442· 0 citations· 29 references
Medicine
TL;DR
Bilateral mix-and-match implantation of EDOF and trifocal IOL implantation showed good visual outcomes for distance, intermediate, and near vision until 12 months, while more than 70% of patients consistently reported that they would recommend the surgery to others.
Abstract
Purpose To evaluate the clinical outcomes after bilateral mix-and-match implantation of extended depth of focus (EDOF) and trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). Methods A total of 134 eyes of 67 patients who had met all inclusion and exclusion criteria and underwent bilateral cataract surgery were included. The Symfony or Symfony toric EDOF IOL (Johnson & Johnson Vision Care Inc.) was implanted in the dominant eye, and the PanOptix or PanOptix toric trifocal IOL (Alcon Laboratories Inc.) in the nondominant eye. The uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), defocus curve, contrast sensitivity, and satisfaction questionnaire were obtained preoperatively and at 1, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results At 12 months after surgery, the mean UDVA (logMAR) was 0.03 ± 0.06 in the EDOF IOL-implanted eyes, 0.07 ± 0.11 in the trifocal IOL-implanted eyes, and 0.02 ± 0.06 in both eyes. The mean UIVA was 0.08 ± 0.08 in EDOF IOL-implanted eyes, 0.09 ± 0.11 in trifocal IOL-implanted eyes, and 0.03 ± 0.08 in both eyes. Mean UNVA was 0.51 ± 0.26 in EDOF IOL-implanted eyes, 0.22 ± 0.16 in trifocal IOL-implanted eyes, and 0.17 ± 0.12 in both eyes. Overall satisfaction rates were 43.3%, 41.1%, and 38.5% at 1, 6, and 12 months, respectively, while more than 70% of patients consistently reported that they would recommend the surgery to others. The most common causes of dissatisfaction were dry eye symptoms and reduced near vision. Conclusions Bilateral mix-and-match implantation of EDOF and trifocal IOL implantation showed good visual outcomes for distance, intermediate, and near vision until 12 months. Most patients satisfied with visual quality, but more dissatisfied with dry eye disease and poor near vision than photopic phenomena like glare and halos.
The subjective and objective visual outcomes after implantation of monofocal, bifocal, and extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses (IOLs) were compared to compare the subjective and objective visual outcomes after implantation of monofocal, bifocal, and extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses (IOLs).
T. Chen, E. Li, Z. Wang et al.· [Zhonghua yan ke za zhi] Chi...· 0 citations
Patients undergoing cataract surgery have different postoperative visual priorities. Some primarily seek excellent uncorrected distance vision and accept the need for near spectacles, whereas others aim for greater spectacle independence across distance, intermediate, and near activities. This study compared visual and patient-reported outcomes after bilateral implantation of an extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL), an enhanced monofocal (EM) IOL and a standard monofocal IOL. This retrospective consecutive comparative case series included patients who underwent bilateral phacoemulsification with implantation of the same IOL model in both eyes. The evaluated IOLs were Tecnis ZCB00 (standard monofocal), Tecnis Eyhance ICB00 (EM), and Asqelio ETLIO130C (EDOF). At 6 months postoperatively, monocular and binocular uncorrected visual acuity were assessed at distance (6 m), intermediate (66 cm), and near (40 cm). Additional outcome measures included manifest refraction, binocular defocus curves, patient-reported halo and glare symptoms, spectacle independence, and patient satisfaction. A total of 197 patients were included (78 monofocal, 65 EM, and 54 EDOF). Baseline demographic and preoperative ocular characteristics were comparable across groups. Postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity was similar among groups. Intermediate visual acuity was better in the EM and EDOF groups than in the monofocal group, with the best intermediate performance observed in the EDOF group. Near visual acuity remained limited in all groups but was better in the EDOF group than in the other groups. Defocus-curve findings were consistent with these results. Patient reported halo and glare scores were low and comparable across groups, whereas spectacle independence was highest in the extended depth-of-focus group. In this retrospective comparative case series, bilateral implantation of the Asqelio EDOF IOL was associated with better intermediate visual acuity and modestly better near visual acuity than implantation of the enhanced and standard monofocal IOLs, without compromising distance visual acuity or increasing patient-reported halo and glare at 6 months.
A. Boz, Mahmut Atum· BMC Ophthalmology· 0 citations
The CNWTTx lens results in excellent visual acuities at distance, intermediate, and near, leading to high rates of spectacle independence and patients are subjectively satisfied with their visual outcomes.
Zachary Zavodni· Journal of Ophthalmology· 0 citations
A clearer understanding of the Liberty 677MTY trifocal toric IOL’s performance is offered, supporting its use as a safe and effective solution for achieving spectacle independence and enhancing postoperative quality of life.
Péter Dormán, Zoltán Z Nagy· BMC Ophthalmology· 0 citations
Purpose To compare the visual and patient reported outcomes of an enhanced monofocal (EM) and refractive extended depth of focus (rEDOF) intraocular lenses (IOL) implanted by a senior trainee in a tertiary referral hospital. Patients and Methods A prospective case-series with a retrospective comparison group was conducted at Westmead Hospital Eye Clinic, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Patients had monocular implantation of an EM (Tecnis Eyhance ICB00) or rEDOF (Lentis Comfort LS-313 MF15 or Acunex Vario Toric AN6VT) IOL. Phacoemulsification was performed by a single trainee surgeon and data was entered into the Cataract & Lens Exchange Analysis & Register log. Primary outcomes were unaided distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA) and near visual acuity (UNVA), visual disturbance (glare, halo, starburst) and satisfaction with vision. Results EM was used in 25 eyes, rEDOF was used in 33 eyes, and a monofocal group of 20 eyes was established retrospectively. Mean monocular UDVA was lowest in the EM and rEDOF groups (UDVA: mono 0.13 ± 0.12 logMAR, EM 0.02 ± 0.13 logMAR, rEDOF 0.05 ± 0.13 logMAR). The UIVA and UNVA were superior in the rEDOF group compared with the monofocal group (UIVA: rEDOF 0.19 ± 0.12 vs mono 0.36 ± 0.22 logMAR, p = 0.011; UNVA: rEDOF 0.45 ± 0.17 vs mono 0.66 ± 0.15 logMAR, p = 0.002). Glare was prevalent in the EM and monofocal groups, and starburst and halos were greatest in the rEDOF group. Satisfaction with vision was high in all groups. Conclusions Both EM and rEDOF IOLs were successfully implanted by a trainee surgeon, with the benefits of improved refractive outcomes over monofocal IOLs and high satisfaction scores. Dysphotopsias were similar between the EM and monofocal IOLs. This study shows that rEDOF and EM IOLs are an ideal premium IOL choice for training centres who wish to expand their IOL options.
Lauren Sartor, C. F. Kong, C. Go et al.· Clinical Ophthalmology· 0 citations
This study aimed to evaluate visual outcomes and patient satisfaction following implantation of a non-diffractive extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) in eyes with cataract developing after pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD). Patients who underwent PPV for RRD, with or without macular involvement, and subsequently developed cataract were prospectively enrolled. Cataract surgery was performed with implantation of the Vivity EDOF-IOL (Alcon). Bilateral implantation was performed according to patient preference. Inclusion criteria were attached retina 3–6 months after PPV and corrected distant visual acuity of 0.3–0.7 logMAR. Primary outcomes were monocular and binocular, corrected and uncorrected distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity (CDVA, UDVA, DCIVA, UIVA, DCNVA, UNVA) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included defocus curve and patient-reported satisfaction. Twenty-seven patients (43 eyes) underwent surgery at 6 ± 3 months after PPV (16 patients bilateral). Thirteen patients had RRD with macular involvement. In the RRD-affected eyes CDVA improved statistically significantly from 0.35 ± 0.16 to 0.03 ± 0.12 and UDVA from 1.01 ± 0.34 to 0.16 ± 0.19 logMAR at 6 months. Mean visual acuities at 6 months for RRD-affected eyes were DCIVA 0.53 ± 0.21, UIVA 0.44 ± 0.15, DCNVA 0.59 ± 0.23, and UNVA 0.47 ± 0.23 logMAR. Binocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA for the bilateral cases were − 0.04 ± 0.11, 0.29 ± 0.10, and 0.26 ± 0.13 logMAR, respectively. The defocus curve was comparable between macula-on, macula-off, and fellow eyes. Patient satisfaction was favorable with just two patients reporting halos. Using the Vivity EDOF-IOL in selected patients with cataract after successful PPV for RRD appears to be a safe and effective option, yielding favorable visual outcomes regardless of macular involvement. DRKS00037029.
Efstathios Vounotrypidis, Dorian Begaj, Rupert Kamnig et al.· Ophthalmology and Therapy· 0 citations