122
Views
3
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Research

Comparison of the Visual Outcomes of an Extended Depth-of-Focus Lens and a Trifocal Lens

, , ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, , ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon show all
Pages 3051-3063 | Published online: 16 Jul 2021
 

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the visual performance of the AcrySof IQ PanOptix trifocal intraocular lens and the TECNIS Symfony extended depth-of-focus lens at near and distance visual ranges.

Methods

A total of 146 patients (221 eyes) who underwent phacoemulsification and cataract extraction and received either a PanOptix or Symfony lens from January 2019 to July 2020 were included in the study (83 PanOptix non-toric, 30 PanOptix toric, 70 Symfony non-toric, and 38 Symfony toric). Uncorrected distance (UDVA), uncorrected near (UNVA), and corrected distance (CDVA) visual acuity were assessed at one-day, one-month, and three-months postoperatively. Averages of UDVA, UNVA, and CDVA were taken to evaluate which lens was superior at near and distance visual ranges. Secondary outcome measures including glare, halo, dryness, and problems with night vision were documented at each postoperative visit.

Results

At one month postoperatively, the average UNVA was 0.16 ± 0.14 logMAR in the PanOptix group and 0.21 ± 0.14 logMAR in the Symfony group (P=0.007); the average UDVA for the PanOptix group was 0.09 ± 0.13 logMAR compared to the Symfony group at 0.10 ± 0.14 logMAR (P=0.67); and the average CDVA was 0.02 ± 0.05 logMAR in the PanOptix group and 0.00 ± 0.04 logMAR in the Symfony group (P=0.11). At three months postoperatively, there were no statistically significant differences in UNVA, UDVA, or CDVA between the two groups (P=0.18, 0.79, 0.68 respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in secondary outcome measures at one- and three-months (P=0.49, 0.10 respectively).

Conclusion

The AcrySof IQ PanOptix trifocal intraocular lens appears to afford better UNVA compared to the TECNIS Symfony extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens at one-month postoperatively, though this difference was not seen at three months postoperatively. There is no statistically significant difference in UDVA and CDVA between the two groups at postoperative day one, one-month, and three-months.

Abbreviations

IOLs, intraocular lenses; EDOF, extended depth-of-focus; D, diopter; UNVA, uncorrected near visual acuity; UDVA, uncorrected distance visual acuity; CDVA, corrected distance visual acuity; POD1, postoperative day one; MRSE, mean refractive spherical equivalent; MRC, mean refractive cylinder.

Ethics Approval and Informed Consent

All patients were fully informed and consented to treatment. All methods and procedures followed the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki and were approved by the Hoopes Vision Research Review Board. Biomedical Research Alliance of New York (Brany) Institutional Review Board (New York) approved this study.

Consent for Publication

We have not included any images, videos, recordings, etcetera requiring consent.

Consent

This retrospective study using de-identified data has been approved by the Hoopes Vision Ethics Board and BRANY IRB #20-12-547-823 (New York). The study conforms with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964, as revised in 2013, concerning human and animal rights. The patients signed informed consent.

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to Michael Bradley, MD, Benjamin Buckner, MD, and Phillip Hoopes Jr., MD for their assistance with surgical procedures, data acquisition, and management.

Author Contributions

All authors made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that is in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis, and interpretation, or in all these areas; took part in drafting, revising or critically reviewing the article; gave final approval of the version to be published; have agreed on the journal to which the article has been submitted; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest in this work.

Additional information

Funding

This study was funded by an unrestricted grant from Research to Prevent Blindness (RPB), 360 Lexington Avenue, 22nd Floor New York, NY 10017. No support was received for the publication of this article.