ArticleEye (London, England)2025
Visual performance following implantation of presbyopia correcting intraocular lenses.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It carries an expression of concern. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preliminary clinical observation of unilateral implantation of trifocal intraocular lens.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- The Effect of the Capsular Bag on the Optical Performance of an IOL Measured in an Ex Vivo Model.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Article
- Comparison of visual performance outcomes following PanOptix and symfony ZXR00 intraocular lens implantation using the area under the distance-corrected defocus curve.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Refractive Accuracy of Intraoperative Aberrometry for a New-Material Trifocal Intraocular Lens: A Multicenter, Prospective, and Observational Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Binocular Reading Speed Comparison: Patients After Bilateral Trifocal IOL Implantation versus Those without Cataract -A Prospective, Dual-Center Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Patient-Reported Outcomes of Visual Disturbances with a Trifocal Intraocular Lens: A Meta-Analysis.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Article
- Sirius Cutting Mode enhances vision and reduces myopia severity through personalized treatment.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Visual performance, safety, and patient satisfaction after binocular clear lens extraction and trifocal intraocular lens implantation in Chinese presbyopic patients.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- A comparative study of two presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses combining bifocal and extended depth-of-focus profiles.International ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Revisiting the Visual Acuity Curves. A Proposed Methodology for the Evaluation of Postoperative Visual Acuity in Presbyopia.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Comparison of Barrett TK Universal II and Barrett Universal II TCRP Formulas in Power Calculations for 3 Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Chromatic aberration and spectral dependency of extended-range-of-vision intraocular lens technology.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Optical performance of a new design of a trifocal intraocular lens based on the Devil's diffractive lens.Biomedical optics express · 2023Article
- Clinical Performance of a New Trifocal IOL with a 7.0 mm Optical Zone.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Expression of concern
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the visual outcomes following bilateral implantation of 3 presbyopia correcting IOLs.
methodsResults are reported for patients who underwent phacoemulsification with bilateral implantation of one of the following IOLs: Panoptix IOL, AT LISA tri IOL and Symphony IOL. Six months postoperative examination included monocular UIVA at 80 and 60 cm and monocular UNVA and DCNVA at 40 cm, monocular UDVA and CDVA, Spherical equivalent (SE) refraction, binocular defocus curve, contrast sensitivity, photopic phenomena, and spectacle independence.
resultsUIVA at 80 cm was significantly better in the AT LISA group and the Symfony groups than the Panoptix group, while UIVA at 60 cm was better in the Symfony group and the Panoptix group than the AT LISA group. A worse DCNVA was recorded in the Symfony group. At a defocus of -2.50 D, the near VA was similar in the PanOptix and AT LISA groups (0.05, 0.07 logMAR respectively), which were significantly better than the Symfony group (0.3 LogMAR). Binocular photopic and scotopic contrast sensitivity outcomes were similar among the three groups at all spatial frequencies. In Symphony group, the frequency and the degree of bother of photic phenomena was relatively higher than the other two groups. Higher percentage of patients in symphony group reported their need for reading glasses.
conclusionPanOptix IOL and AT LISA IOL would be a good choice for patients aiming for an optimum near vision, while Symfony IOL seems suitable for patients having the priority for good intermediate vision.
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.