ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Optical and Clinical Outcomes of an Isofocal Intraocular Lens vs. a Monofocal Standard Lens.
Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictions of Through-Focus Performance of Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lenses in Presbyopic Subjects Using a Visual Simulator.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Comparative visual and refractive analysis of two enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Refining mini-monovision with monofocal plus intraocular lenses.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Article
- Advanced vs. Standard Monofocal IOLs: Optical Quality and Patient-Perceived Visual Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Design concepts for advanced-technology intraocular lenses [Invited].Biomedical optics express · 2025Article
- Optical power profiles and aberrations of a non-diffractive wavefront-shaping extended depth of focus intraocular lens.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study is to evaluate the results obtained on the optical bench and clinically with an isofocal lens (ISOPure, BVI medical, Belgium) to compare them to a standard monofocal one (MicroPure, BVI medical, Belgium). To do so, we have combined laboratory investigation and a prospective, comparative, and randomized clinical study. First, we have measured the wavefront of the two models studied using a NIMO TR1504 (Lambda-X, Belgium) deflectometer for three nominal powers: +10.00, +20.00 and +30.00 D. In the randomized study with 48 patients, half of them implanted with ISOPure and the other with MicroPure, we have measured visual acuities and contrast sensitivity under photopic and mesopic conditions. The optical bench results show that the isofocal lens presented higher power than the monofocal one, at the lens center, due to the spherical aberration (coefficients Z(4,0), Z(6,0) and Z(8,0)) induced by the greater asphericity of its design. The addition obtained depended on the nominal power, from +1.00 to +1.50 D. The results of the clinical study showed that the ISOPure lens presented better visual outcomes, which were statistically significant, at intermediate distance compared to the MicroPure lens (
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.