Refractive Versus Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lenses in Cataract Surgery: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Xu, Xian; Zhu, Ming; Zou, Haidong

doi:10.3928/1081597x-20140814-04

Cited by 21 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mean logMAR VA in DCIVA was much higher in our study (0.04 ± 0.06) than in the spherical diffractive (0.38 ± 0.14) and aspheric diffractive MFIOLs (0.14 ± 0.17) at the 60 cm distance [ 10 ]. Binocular UIVA was significantly better in the refractive MFIOLs than in the diffractive MFIOLs [ 21 ] and was similar to OptiVis results. In the study by Chiam et al [ 22 ], UIVA was 0.24 ± 0.1 in the ReZoom group, similar to the results obtained for the OptiVis group (0.23 ± 0.22).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 61%

Clinical Results of Diffractive, Refractive, Hybrid Multifocal, and Monofocal Intraocular Lenses

Dyrda

Martinez-Palmer

Martín-Moral

et al. 2018

Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To present the outcomes of hybrid multifocal and monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and to compare with refractive and diffractive multifocal IOLs (MFIOLs). Methods Three hundred twenty eyes (160 patients) underwent cataract surgery with randomized IOLs bilateral implantation. Changes in uncorrected and distance-corrected logMAR distance, intermediate and near (UNVA and DCNVA) visual acuity (VA), contrast sensitivity (CS), presence of dysphotopsia, spectacle independence, and patient satisfaction were analyzed. Results Postoperative VA in the hybrid (OptiVis) group was improved in all distances (p < 0.001). OptiVis acted superiorly to monofocal IOLs in UNVA and DCNVA (p < 0.001 for both) and to refractive ones in DCNVA (p < 0.005). Distance, mesopic, without glare CS in OptiVis was lower than in the monofocal group and similar to other MFIOLs. No differences in dysphotopsia pre- and postoperatively and spectacle independence in near for OptiVis and refractive MFIOLs were detected. OptiVis patients were more satisfied than those with monofocal IOLs (p=0.015). Conclusions After cataract surgery, patients with OptiVis improved VA in all distances. Near and intermediate VA was better than monofocal, and DCNVA was better than the refractive group. CS was lower in OptiVis than in the monofocal group, but there was no difference between MFIOLs. Patient satisfaction was higher in OptiVis than in the monofocal group. This trial is registered with NCT03512626.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 61%

Clinical Results of Diffractive, Refractive, Hybrid Multifocal, and Monofocal Intraocular Lenses

Dyrda

Martinez-Palmer

Martín-Moral

et al. 2018

Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A meta-analysis comparing the results of refractive versus diffractive IOLs in 2014 demonstrated greater uncorrected distance vision in the refractive MFIOL group. [ 40 ]…”

Section: Visual Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimizing outcomes with multifocal intraocular lenses

Sachdev

2017

Indian J Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modern day cataract surgery is evolving from a visual restorative to a refractive procedure. The advent of multifocal intraocular lenses (MFIOLs) allows greater spectacle independence and increased quality of life postoperatively. Since the inception in 1980s, MFIOLs have undergone various technical advancements including trifocal and extended depth of vision implants more recently. A thorough preoperative workup including the patients’ visual needs and inherent ocular anatomy allows us to achieve superior outcomes. This review offers a comprehensive overview of the various types of MFIOLs and principles of optimizing outcomes through a comprehensive preoperative screening and management of postoperative complications.

show abstract

“…An eye with an IOL is usually referred to as pseudophakic. Extensive literature is available on the effect of IOL types on visual function 13,14 and reading. 15–17 However, only a few studies 18–21 have investigated the difference in reading performance across individuals with cataract, pseudophakia, and normal vision.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a Reading Accessibility Index Using the MNREAD Acuity Chart

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Refractive Versus Diffractive Multifocal Intraocular Lenses in Cataract Surgery: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Abstract: Refractive MIOLs can provide better distance vision, whereas diffractive MIOLs provide better near vision, reading ability, and equivalent intermediate vision, reduce unwanted photic phenomena, and allow greater spectacle independence.

Cited by 21 publications

References 40 publications

Clinical Results of Diffractive, Refractive, Hybrid Multifocal, and Monofocal Intraocular Lenses

Clinical Results of Diffractive, Refractive, Hybrid Multifocal, and Monofocal Intraocular Lenses

Optimizing outcomes with multifocal intraocular lenses

Development of a Reading Accessibility Index Using the MNREAD Acuity Chart

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About