PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of mix-and-match implantation of a diffractive extended depth of focus intraocular lens (IOL) (TECNIS Symfony ZXR00; Johnson & Johnson Vision) and a diffractive bifocal IOL (TECNIS ZLB00 +3.25 diopters [D]; Johnson & Johnson Vision) and bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal IOL (AcrySof IQ PanOptix; Alcon Laboratories, Inc). METHODS: This prospective comparative study compares the clinical outcomes of patients with age-related cataract undergoing cataract surgery using the IOLs described. Patients were divided into the mix-and-match group and the trifocal group. Assessment included monocular and binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), intermediate visual acuity (UIVA at 60 cm), and near visual acuity (UNVA at 40 cm), uncorrected defocus curves, contrast sensitivity, and reading speed. Quality of vision was measured with the Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25). RESULTS: A total of 50 patients (25 in each group) were enrolled. At 6 months postoperatively, outcomes of binocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA were similar in both groups. The binocular defocus curve only differed at vergences of -0.50 to -1.00 D (better for the mix-and-match group; P = .032 and .004, respectively) and at -4.00 D (better for the trifocal group; P = .001). Significantly higher reading speeds in the mix-and-match group were measured at 0.7 and 0.5 logMAR (P = .038 and .034, respectively). There were no significant differences between groups for contrast sensitivity and the results of the questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: The mix-and-match implantation seemed to be a good option for patients with high demands for distance and intermediate visual acuity, whereas the trifocal IOL appeared to be more suitable for patients with enhanced near vision demands. [J Refract Surg. 2020;36(8):528-535.]. Copyright 2020, SLACK Incorporated.
PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of mix-and-match implantation of a diffractive extended depth of focus intraocular lens (IOL) (TECNIS Symfony ZXR00; Johnson & Johnson Vision) and a diffractive bifocal IOL (TECNIS ZLB00 +3.25 diopters [D]; Johnson & Johnson Vision) and bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal IOL (AcrySof IQ PanOptix; Alcon Laboratories, Inc). METHODS: This prospective comparative study compares the clinical outcomes of patients with age-related cataract undergoing cataract surgery using the IOLs described. Patients were divided into the mix-and-match group and the trifocal group. Assessment included monocular and binocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), intermediate visual acuity (UIVA at 60 cm), and near visual acuity (UNVA at 40 cm), uncorrected defocus curves, contrast sensitivity, and reading speed. Quality of vision was measured with the Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25). RESULTS: A total of 50 patients (25 in each group) were enrolled. At 6 months postoperatively, outcomes of binocular UDVA, UIVA, and UNVA were similar in both groups. The binocular defocus curve only differed at vergences of -0.50 to -1.00 D (better for the mix-and-match group; P = .032 and .004, respectively) and at -4.00 D (better for the trifocal group; P = .001). Significantly higher reading speeds in the mix-and-match group were measured at 0.7 and 0.5 logMAR (P = .038 and .034, respectively). There were no significant differences between groups for contrast sensitivity and the results of the questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: The mix-and-match implantation seemed to be a good option for patients with high demands for distance and intermediate visual acuity, whereas the trifocal IOL appeared to be more suitable for patients with enhanced near vision demands. [J Refract Surg. 2020;36(8):528-535.]. Copyright 2020, SLACK Incorporated.
Authors: Ji Eun Song; So Young Han; Ramin Khoramnia; Tamer Tandogan; Gerd U Auffarth; Chul Young Choi Journal: J Ophthalmol Date: 2021-09-07 Impact factor: 1.909