Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37071325›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2023

Clinical Evaluation of a Modified Light Transmission Short-Wavelength Filtering Intraocular Lens Compared to a Colorless Control.

Daniel H Chang, Vance M Thompson, William C Christie, Y Ralph Chu, Ryan S Vida

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06567834 (Clinical Evaluation of Violet Light Filtration and High-resolution Lathing on a Diffractive Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06567834 nacompletednot on this map

Clinical Evaluation of Violet Light Filtration and High-resolution Lathing on a Diffractive Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens (IOL)

TypeinterventionalSponsorEmpire Eye and Laser CenterRan2022 to 2023Enrolled60ConditionsCataract, PresbyopiaArmsTecnis Symfony Optiblue/Tecnis Symfony Optiblue Toric (Models ZXR00V/ZXW150), Tecnis Symfony/Tecnis Symfony Toric (Models ZXR00/ZXT150)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Daniel H ChangEmpire Eye and Laser Center, Bakersfield, CA, USA.
Vance M ThompsonVance Thompson Vision, Sioux Falls, SD, USA.
William C ChristieScott and Christie Eyecare Associates, Cranberry Township, PA, USA.
Y Ralph ChuChu Vision Institute, Bloomington, MN, USA.
Ryan S VidaJohnson & Johnson Surgical Vision, Irvine, CA, USA. rvida@its.jnj.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0520-7855
Chu Vision Institute · USEmpire Eye Physicians · USEye Care Associates · USJohnson & Johnson (United States) · USVance Thompson Vision · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a violet-light filtering intraocular lens (IOL) compared to a colorless IOL control.

methodsThis was a prospective, bilateral, randomized, comparative, patient/evaluator-masked multi-center clinical trial at 12 sites in the USA. Patients underwent standard small-incision phacoemulsification cataract extraction. Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and color vision were tested 12 months postoperatively. Patient satisfaction and vision-related quality of life were evaluated based on directed patient responses obtained from a binocular subjective questionnaire.

resultsA total of 250 subjects were bilaterally implanted with the violet-light filtering TECNIS monofocal ZV9003 (n = 126) and colorless TECNIS monofocal ZA9003 (n = 124). Mean uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was 0.123 LogMAR for ZV9003 and 0.116 LogMAR for the ZA9003 group. Mean corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was 0.00 LogMAR for both groups. No significant difference was found between the groups for 22/25 questionnaire categories, including color perception. A significant difference was found in favor of the ZV9003 group for day driving, night driving, and frustration with vision. Contrast sensitivity mean difference was < 0.05 log units across all lighting conditions and spatial frequencies.

conclusionNo difference was found between groups for visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, color testing, and adverse events as well as with the majority of optical/visual symptoms. A statistical difference was noted in driving and frustration with eyesight that may be related to benefits of using a violet-light filtering chromophore. Overall, the violet-light filtering ZV9003 showed excellent visual acuity and contrast sensitivity results with a low incidence of optical/visual symptoms.

Indexed as

Blue lightColor testingFiltering chromophoresMonofocal intraocular lensUltraviolet filteringViolet light-filtering IOL

Identifiers

PMID37071325
PMCPMC10164208
OpenAlexW4366235882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.