Comparison of visual outcomes between bilateral trifocal intraocular lenses and combined bifocal intraocular lenses with different near addition
- 24 Downloads
To compare outcomes in patients implanted bilaterally with a trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) with patients implanted with bifocal IOLs having different near addition in each eye.
Nonrandomized comparative study.
Seventy-eight patients scheduled for multifocal IOL implantation were divided into a trifocal group (n=32) implanted bilaterally with trifocal IOLs (Alcon TFNT00), and a combined bifocal group (n=46) implanted with a bifocal IOL with +3.0 diopter (D) addition in the dominant eye and +4.0D addition in the nondominant eye. At 3 months postoperatively, binocular all-distance visual acuity (VA), binocular contrast VA alone and with glare (glare VA), near stereoacuity, and incidence of patients reporting halo symptoms were assessed.
Both mean binocular uncorrected and corrected VAs at far to intermediate distances were significantly better in the trifocal group than in the combined bifocal group (P≤0.0325), while binocular near VA did not differ significantly between groups. Mean photopic and mesopic contrast VA and glare VA at most contrasts, and stereoacuity were significantly better in the trifocal group than in the combined bifocal group (P≤0.0426). The incidence of patients reporting moderate halo symptoms was significantly greater in the trifocal group (P=0.0482).
Bilateral implantation of a trifocal IOL provided significantly better binocular VA at far to intermediate distances and comparable near VA compared with combined implantation of bifocal IOLs with +3.0D and +4.0D addition. Contrast VA and stereoacuity were significantly better, but the incidence of halo symptoms tended to be worse in patients with trifocal IOLs.
KeywordsCataract surgery Trifocal intraocular lens Combined implantation of bifocal intraocular lenses Near addition power Binocular visual function
The authors thank Koji Yonemoto, PhD (Ryukyu University, Naha, Japan) for statistical assistance.
Conflicts of interest
K. Hayashi, None; T. Sato, None; C. Igarashi, None; M. Yoshida, None.
- 7.Nuijts RM, Jonker SM, Kaufer RA, Lapid-Gortzak R, Mendicute J, Martinez CP, et al. Bilateral implantation of +2.5 D multifocal intraocular lens and contralateral implantation of +2.5 D and +3.0 D multifocal intraocular lenses: clinical outcomes. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016;42:194–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Shen Z, Lin Y, Zhu Y, Liu X, Yan J, Yao K, Shen Z, Lin Y, Yanan Z, Liu X, Yan J, Yao K. Clinical comparison of patient outcomes following implantation of trifocal or bifocal intraocular lenses: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep45337.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 18.Gunderson KG, Potvin R. Comparison of visual outcomes and subjective visual quality after bilateral implantation of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens and blended implantation of apodized diffractive bifocal intraocular lenses. Clin Ophthalmol. 2016;10:805–11.Google Scholar