SynthesisBMC ophthalmology2019
Comparison of postoperative visual performance between bifocal and trifocal intraocular Lens based on randomized controlled trails: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Trifocal intraocular lenses versus bifocal intraocular lenses after cataract extraction among participants with presbyopia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Comparative Efficacy Between Trifocal and Bifocal Intraocular Lens Among Patients Undergoing Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Trifocal intraocular lenses versus bifocal intraocular lenses after cataract extraction among participants with presbyopia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Clinical Outcomes of a Bi-Aspheric Trifocal Diffractive Intraocular Lens.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Trial
- Comparative Visual Outcomes of Toric and Nontoric Intraocular Lenses Featuring Combined Diffractive Extended Depth of Focus and Multifocal Designs.Journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Early Clinical Results of a Newly Developed Continuous Range of Vision Intraocular Lens.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Article
- Risk factors in self-reported dissatisfied patients implanted with various presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses after cataract surgery.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Six-Month Visual and Patient-Reported Outcomes of a Biaspheric Trifocal IOL in Asian and European Cataract Patients: A Comparative Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Visual performance and patient preference with bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus or combined implantation of an extended depth of focus/trifocal intraocular lens.International ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Clinical Performance of an Omnidirectional Aberration-Free Trifocal Toric Intraocular Lens.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Clinical Performance of a New Trifocal IOL with a 7.0 mm Optical Zone.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
- Visual Performance, Satisfaction, and Spectacle Independence after Implantation of a New Hydrophobic Trifocal Intraocular Lens.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Depth of field and visual performance after implantation of a new hydrophobic trifocal intraocular lens.BMC ophthalmology · 2022Observational
- Comparative analysis of visual quality between unilateral implantation of a trifocal intraocular lens and a rotationally asymmetric refractive multifocal intraocular lens.International journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Outcomes of a Refractive Segmented Bifocal Intraocular Lens with a Lower Near Addition.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Article
- First Results after Implantation of Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic Trifocal Intraocular Lenses: Visual and Optical Performance.Journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Clinical Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction with a New Diffractive-Refractive Trifocal Intraocular Lens - A 12 Month Prospective Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Article
- Visual and satisfaction results with implantation of the trifocal Panoptix® intraocular lens in cataract surgery.Journal of optometryObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the clinical performance of bifocal and trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) in cataract surgery, a meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials was conducted.
methodsA comprehensive literature retrieval of PubMed, Science Direct and EMBASE was performed in this systematic review. Clinical outcomes included visual acuity (VA), contrast sensitivity (CS), spectacle independence, postoperative refraction and surgical satisfaction.
resultsThere were 8 RCTs included in this study. The difference of uncorrected near VA (UNVA) between the bifocal IOLs and trifocal IOLs had no significance [MD = 0.02, 95%CI: (- 0.03,0.06)]. There was no significant difference in the distant-corrected near VA (DCNVA) with MD of 0.04 [95%CI (- 0.02, 0.10)]. Compared with trifocal group, the uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) [MD = 0.09,95%CI:(0.01,0.17)] was significantly worse in the bifocal group. No difference was found in distance-corrected intermediate VA (DCIVA) [MD = 0.09, 95%CI: (- 0.04, 0.23)] between two groups. Analysis on AT LISA subgroup indicated the bifocal group had worse intermediate VA than trifocal group (AT LISA tri 839 M) [MD = 0.18, 95%CI: (0.12, 0.24) for UIVA and MD = 0.19, 95%CI: (0.13, 0.25) for DCIVA]. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in the uncorrected distance VA (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) [MD = 0.01, 95%CI: (- 0.01,0.04) for UDVA; MD = 0.00, 95%CI: (- 0.01,0.01) for CDVA]. The postoperative refraction of bifocal group was similar to that of trifocal group [MD = -0.08, 95% CI: (- 0.19, 0.03) for spherical equivalent; MD = -0.09, 95%CI: (- 0.21, 0.03) for cylinder; MD = -0.09, 95% CI: (- 0.27, 0.08) for sphere]. No difference was found for spectacle independence, posterior capsular opacification (PCO) incidence and patient satisfaction between bifocal IOLs and trifocal IOLs. [RR = 0.89, 95% CI: (0.71, 1.12) for spectacle independence; RR = 1.81, 95% CI: (0.50, 6.54) for PCO incidence; RR = 0.98, 5% CI: (0.86, 1.12) for patient satisfaction].
conclusionPatients receiving trifocal IOLs, especially AT LISA tri 839 M, have a better intermediate VA than those receiving bifocal IOLs. Near and distance visual performance, spectacle independence, postoperative refraction and surgical satisfaction of bifocal IOLs were similar to those of trifocal IOLs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.