ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2021
First Results after Implantation of Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic Trifocal Intraocular Lenses: Visual and Optical Performance.
Article in Journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Outcomes of the First Diffractive Trifocal Intraocular Lens: A Literature Review.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- Nd:YAG Capsulotomy Rates of Three FineVision Trifocal Intraocular Lens Platform Across Different Platforms: Results from a Multicenter Clinical Registry Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Performance of Trifocal Intraocular Lens Implantation in Highly Myopic Patients With and Without Astigmatism.Cureus · 2025Article
- Refractive Outcomes After Cataract Surgery-The Impact of Preoperative Visual Acuity, the Intraocular Lens Model, and the Surgeon's Experience: An Empirical Analysis of Hungarian and Kosovan Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens with phacoemulsification and femtosecond laser assisted cataract surgery.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Observational
- Refractive Outcome and 5-Year Capsulotomy Rate of Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic IOLs with Similar Optical Design: A Contralateral Study.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Article
- Visual Performance, Satisfaction, and Spectacle Independence after Implantation of a New Hydrophobic Trifocal Intraocular Lens.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Observation of Visual Quality after Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery Combined with Trifocal Intraocular Lens Implantation.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare postcataract surgery visual and optical performance between two trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) with the same optical design: a hydrophobic acrylic glistening-free IOL and a hydrophilic acrylic IOL.
methodsPatients were bilaterally implanted with either the hydrophobic or the hydrophilic IOL. The data of the patients' right eyes were evaluated. Visual quality assessments included refractive outcomes, monocular visual acuity (VA) at far, intermediate, and near distances, defocus curve, aberrations (spherical aberration (SA)), root mean square (RMS) of corneal, internal, and total higher-order aberrations (HOAs)), and tilt of IOL.
resultsFifty-one patients were included in the analysis: 26 patients implanted with the hydrophobic IOL and 25 patients implanted with the hydrophilic IOL. At 1 month, no statistically significant differences were found for monocular uncorrected and corrected VA at distance, distance-corrected VA at intermediate and near, defocus curve, manifest spherical equivalent, total SA, and RMS of the total, internal, and corneal HOA. The defocus curve of both groups showed a visual acuity of 0.3 logMAR or better in the intermediate range from 0.5 to -2.5 D of vergence level with no significant differences between the groups. Compared to the hydrophilic group,
conclusionBoth IOLs demonstrated an excellent quality of vision and provided the patient with a wide range of vision.
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.