Visual performance after bilateral implantation of 2 new presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses: Trifocal versus extended range of vision.

PURPOSE

To compare the visual outcomes and quality of vision of 2 new diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with those of a monofocal IOL.

SETTING

Fatebenefratelli e Oftalmico Hospital, Milan, Italy.

DESIGN

Prospective case series.

METHODS

Patients had bilateral cataract surgery with implantation of a trifocal IOL (Panoptix), an extended-range-of-vision IOL (Symfony), or a monofocal IOL (SN60WF). Postoperative examinations included assessing distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity; binocular defocus; intraocular and total aberrations; point-spread function (PSF); modulation transfer function (MTF); retinal straylight; and quality-of-vision (QoV) and spectacle-dependence questionnaires.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients (152 eyes) were assessed for study eligibility. Twenty patients (40 eyes) in each arm of the study (60 patients, 120 eyes) completed the outcome assessment. At the 4-month follow-up, the trifocal group had significantly better near visual acuity than the extended-range-of-vision group (P = .005). The defocus curve showed the trifocal IOL had better intermediate/near performance than the extended-range-of-vision IOL and both multifocal IOLs performed better than the monofocal IOL. Intragroup comparison of the total higher-order aberrations, PSF, MTF, and retinal straylight were not statistically different. The QoV questionnaire results showed no differences in dysphotopsia between the multifocal IOL groups; however, the results were significantly higher than in the monofocal IOL group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both multifocal IOLs seemed to be good options for patients with intermediate-vision requirements, whereas the trifocal IOL might be better for patients with near-vision requirements. The significant perception of visual side effects indicates that patients still must be counseled about these effects before a multifocal IOL is implanted.