ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Clinical Outcomes after Bilateral Implantation of Trifocal Diffractive Intraocular Lenses and Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Visual, Refractive, Functional, and Patient Satisfaction Outcomes After Implantation of a New Trifocal Diffractive Intraocular Lens.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Clinical outcomes of a new four-haptic hydrophobic presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Should Multifocal Intraocular Lenses Become a Standard in Phacoemulsification Cataract Surgery?Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this retrospective study is to investigate clinical outcomes of bilateral implantation of diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and extended depth of focus IOLs in Koreans. The clinical outcomes of cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of PanOptix, FineVision, Symfony, and MiniWell were evaluated. Uncorrected distant, intermediate (80 cm, 60 cm), near (40 cm) visual acuity, defocus curve, manifest refraction, contrast sensitivity, and higher-order aberrations, quality of vision, spectacle independence, and subjective satisfaction at postoperative 3 months were assessed. A total of 136 eyes in 68 patients were included in the analyses. PanOptix and FineVision performed better visual acuity compared to Symfony and MiniWell at 40 cm distance. Defocus curve showed broad range of vision in PanOptix and FineVision with visual acuity of more than 0.1 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution at -2.5 diopter (D) of defocus power, while Symfony and MiniWell presented excellent intermediate vision without a dip at defocus power of -0.5 D to -1.0 D. Glare, halo, and starburst were significantly less in MiniWell compared to others. In conclusion, all four IOLs presented satisfactory clinical outcomes. PanOptix and FineVision provided good near and intermediate vision, while Symfony and MiniWell provided good intermediate vision. MiniWell induced little dysphotopsia.
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.