Literature DB >> 32267951

Extended Depth of Focus Versus Monofocal IOLs: Objective and Subjective Visual Outcomes.

Emilio Pedrotti, Chiara Chierego, Pietro Maria Talli, Federico Selvi, Alice Galzignato, Enrico Neri, Guido Barosco, Andrea Montresor, Anna Rodella, Giorgio Marchini.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the objective and subjective outcomes between bilateral implantation of the extended depth of focus (EDOF) Mini Well intraocular lens (IOL) and the aspheric monofocal Mini-4-Ready IOL (both SIFI S.p.A., Catania, Italy).
METHODS: This prospective comparative study included 25 patients (50 eyes) bilaterally implanted with an EDOF Mini Well IOL (EDOF group) and 25 patients (50 eyes) bilaterally implanted with a Mini-4-Ready IOL (monofocal group). Three-month follow-up data included corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity at 4 m and 80, 67, and 40 cm. Defocus curves, subjective and objective contrast sensitivity, and objective optical quality (modulation transfer function cutoff and Strehl ratio calculated with Optical Quality Analysis System [OQAS]; Visiometrics SL, Terrassa, Spain), halometry, and reading performance were measured. Subjective visual quality was evaluated based on National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument 42 (NEI RQL-42) scores.
RESULTS: Postoperative uncorrected and corrected monocular and binocular intermediate and near visual acuity was significantly better in the EDOF group (P < .001). No differences were observed for distance visual acuity (P ⩾ .312). Defocus curve outcomes for myopic values were better in the EDOF group (P < .001). No significant differences were found in hyperopic (obtained in steps of +0.50 diopters [D] from emmetropia to 1.50 D) values (P ⩾ .095), contrast sensitivity curves (P ⩾ .087), or OQAS outcomes (P ⩾ .138). Halometric values were significantly better in the monofocal group (P < .05). There was a correlation between mean keratometry values and intermediate/near visual acuity. Significantly better NEI RQL-42 subscale scores for near vision, far vision, activity limitations, glare, dependence on correction, and suboptimal correction were noted in the EDOF group (P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: Intermediate and near visual acuity was better after EDOF IOL than after aspheric monofocal IOL implantation while maintaining similar levels of visual quality, except for halo perception. [J Refract Surg. 2020;36(4):214-222.]. Copyright 2020, SLACK Incorporated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32267951     DOI: 10.3928/1081597X-20200212-01

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Refract Surg        ISSN: 1081-597X            Impact factor:   3.573


  10 in total

1.  Visual Outcomes and Optical Quality of Accommodative, Multifocal, Extended Depth-of-Focus, and Monofocal Intraocular Lenses in Presbyopia-Correcting Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jeong-Yeon Cho; Yeo Kyoung Won; Jongyeop Park; Jin Hyun Nam; Ji-Yoon Hong; Serim Min; Nahyun Kim; Tae-Young Chung; Eui-Kyung Lee; Sun-Hong Kwon; Dong Hui Lim
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-09-22       Impact factor: 8.253

2.  Comparative analysis of a presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens that combines extended depth-of-focus and bifocal profiles with a standard monofocal intraocular lens.

Authors:  Da Eun Shin; Hun Lee; Kyungmin Koh
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-07-14       Impact factor: 2.086

3.  Difference in Quality of Vision Outcome among Extended Depth of Focus, Bifocal, and Monofocal Intraocular Lens Implantation.

Authors:  Chen-Cheng Chao; Hung-Yuan Lin; Chia-Yi Lee; Elsa Lin-Chin Mai; Ie-Bin Lian; Chao-Kai Chang
Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-28

4.  Visual Outcomes after Implantation of Lucidis EDOF IOL.

Authors:  Mark Rabinovich; Gaia Ceresara; Ana Aramburu Del Boz; Danial Al Khatib; Marie Crespe; Jerome Bovet
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-05-28       Impact factor: 1.974

5.  Refractive and Visual Outcomes After Implantation of a Secondary Sulcus Intraocular Lens with an Extended Depth of Focus.

Authors:  Kjell Gunnar Gundersen; Richard Potvin
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-06-09

6.  Clinical Performance of Extended Depth of Focus (EDOF) Intraocular Lenses - A Retrospective Comparative Study of Mini Well Ready and Symfony.

Authors:  Katarzyna Ewa Nowik; Kamil Nowik; Piotr Kanclerz; Jacek Paweł Szaflik
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-05-26

7.  Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses Implantation in Eyes After Corneal Refractive Laser Surgery: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Authors:  Yang Sun; Yingying Hong; Xianfang Rong; Yinghong Ji
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-04-11

8.  Clinical Outcomes with a Novel Extended Depth of Focus Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lens: Pilot Study.

Authors:  María T Iradier; Verónica Cruz; Naty Gentile; Priscila Cedano; David P Piñero
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-03-19

Review 9.  Comparison of Patient Outcomes following Implantation of Trifocal and Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Yining Guo; Yinhao Wang; Ran Hao; Xiaodan Jiang; Ziyuan Liu; Xuemin Li
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-12-29       Impact factor: 1.909

10.  Visual Performances of a New Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lens with a Refractive Design: A Prospective Study After Bilateral Implantation.

Authors:  Leopoldo Spadea; Maria Ilaria Giannico; Martina Formisano; Ludovico Alisi
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 2.423

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.