ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2023
Spectral Effects and Range of Focus in a Multizonal-Refractive Intraocular Lens Compared with a Standard Trifocal Diffractive Design.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Polychromatic Virtual Retinal Imaging of Two Extended-Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lenses.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Optical Bench Evaluation of a Novel, Hydrophobic, Acrylic, One-Piece, Polyfocal Intraocular Lens with a "Zig-Zag" L-Loop Haptic Design.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Visual and patient reported outcomes provided by a refractive multifocal intraocular lens based on continuous transitional focus.Eye and vision (London, England) · 2024Article
- Chromatic aberration and spectral dependency of extended-range-of-vision intraocular lens technology.Scientific reports · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study was performed to compare the optical performance of a multizonal presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens (IOL) and a conventional trifocal model.
methodsThe optical quality and simulated visual acuity (VA) of 570 Precizon Presbyopic NVA (OPHTEC BV) and AcrySof IQ PanOptix (Alcon) were compared. The Precizon features a refractive design consisting of alternating optical zones that converge the incident light into two principal foci and a transitional zone for intermediate vision. By contrast, the PanOptix applies a diffractive (non-apodized) profile to achieve trifocality. Simulated VA was derived from the modulation transfer function. Chromatic aberration effects were also studied.
resultsThe diffractive and multizonal-refractive lenses yielded comparable simulated VAs at far focus (0.00 logMAR). All curves showed a reduction in expected VA with an increase in negative defocus. At - 1.0 D, the multizonal-refractive IOL's VA dropped by 0.05 logMAR, but for the diffractive model, it was one line (0.11 logMAR). The multizonal-refractive lens's VA prediction at the secondary peak was 0.03 logMAR-minimally better than the 0.06 logMAR of the diffractive lens at - 2.5 D. The refractive lens exhibited a 24% decrease in polychromatic optical quality due to material dispersion. The performance of PanOptix was more substantially affected, showing a 44% loss at 50 lp/mm at far, with minimal effects at other distances.
conclusionThe multizonal-refractive lens does not fall short of the established trifocal IOL, and it can be used to extend the visual range of pseudophakic patients. Although the multizonal-refractive lens has lower material dispersion, the diffractive model corrects chromatism beyond far focus.
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.