Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37240694›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023

Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lenses: A Retrospective, Comparative Study between Three Different Models.

Rita Mencucci, Alberto Morelli, Michela Cennamo, Anna Maria Roszkowska, Eleonora Favuzza

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Adaptive-Optics-Based Simulation of Astigmatism Effects on Visual Acuity with Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lenses.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
    Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. The Science of Pseudoaccommodation and Its Therapeutic Potential.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Basic Optics Underlying Current Intraocular Lenses.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rita MencucciEye Clinic, Careggi Hospital, Department of Neurosciences, Psychology, Pharmacology and Child Health (NEUROFARBA), University of Florence, 50134 Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1856-6363
Alberto MorelliEye Clinic, Careggi Hospital, Department of Neurosciences, Psychology, Pharmacology and Child Health (NEUROFARBA), University of Florence, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Michela CennamoEye Clinic, Careggi Hospital, Department of Neurosciences, Psychology, Pharmacology and Child Health (NEUROFARBA), University of Florence, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Anna Maria RoszkowskaOphthalmology Clinic, Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Messina, 98100 Messina, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8083-3437
Eleonora FavuzzaEye Clinic, Careggi Hospital, Department of Neurosciences, Psychology, Pharmacology and Child Health (NEUROFARBA), University of Florence, 50134 Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2223-0187
University of Florence · ITUniversity of Messina · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the visual performance and optical quality between three new enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). This retrospective study included patients affected by cataracts with corneal astigmatism less than 0.75 D and no ocular comorbidities who underwent cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of Tecnis Eyhance ICB00 (Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc., Jacksonville, FL, USA), Vivinex Impress XY1-EM (Hoya Surgical Optics, Singapore) or IsoPure 123 (PhysIOL, Liege, Belgium) IOLs. Three months postoperatively, monocular and binocular uncorrected and corrected distant, and intermediate and near visual acuities were measured. Binocular defocus curve, photopic contrast sensitivity, Point Spread Function (PSF), low order aberrations (LOAs), high order aberrations (HOAs), objective scatter index (OSI), halo and glare perception were also evaluated. This study included a total of 72 eyes from 36 patients. Visual acuity outcomes, PSF, LOAs, HOAs and OSI were similar between groups. There were no statistically significant differences in terms of photopic contrast sensitivity, halo or glare perception. In patients without ocular comorbidities, the Eyhance ICB00 IOL, the Vivinex Impress IOL and the Isopure IOL-even though based on different optical properties-provided similar results in terms of visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and intraocular aberrations, with no influence on photic phenomena.

Indexed as

cataractcataract surgeryenhanced monofocalenhanced monofocal iolintraocular lensmonofocal intraocular lensmonofocal IOLpresbyopia

Identifiers

PMID37240694
PMCPMC10219279
OpenAlexW4377287929

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.