Trial reportBMC ophthalmology2023
Comparison of bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus lenses and a blend approach of extended depth of focus lenses and bifocal lenses in cataract patients.
Trial report in BMC ophthalmology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the effects of trifocals and extended depth of focus intraocular lens implantation on stereopsis and contrast sensitivity in cataract patients.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Trial
- Factors Affecting Postoperative Satisfaction After Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lens.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- A comparative study of extended depth of focus, bifocal intraocular lenses and their mix-and-match.International journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Review of Mix-and-Match Approach and Binocular Intraocular Lens Systems.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Effect of crystalline lens decentration and tilt on visual performance in eyes implanted with bifocal or extended depth of focus intraocular lenses.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Observational
- Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Mix-and-Match Implantation of a Trifocal and Non-Diffractive Extended Depth of Focus IOL.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Clinical outcomes after mix-and-match implantation of monofocal and refractive multifocal intraocular lenses after surgery.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Efficacy and comfort following the implantation of extended depth of focus, multifocal, and monofocal intraocular lenses in cataract patients.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Long-term Results after Bilateral Implantation of Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lenses with Mini-Monovision.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the visual outcomes, spectacle independent rate and stereopsis in patients who underwent bilateral implantation of extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL), or a blend approach of EDOF and bifocal IOL.
methodsA total of 60 cataract patients, who were scheduled for phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation in both eyes in West China Hospital of Sichuan University, were enrolled and divided into Micro monovision group(-0.5D~-1.0D), Non-micro monovision group (< 0.5D) with Symfony IOL, and Mixed group with Symfony and ZMB00 IOLs. Three months postoperatively, we compared the visual acuity, modulation transfer function (MTF), defocus curve, stereopsis, spectacle independence, and photic phenomena among the three groups.
resultsCompared to the Non-micro monovision group (UNVA: 0.07 ± 0.04), Micro monovision group (UNVA: 0.00 ± 0.07, P < 0.001) and Mixed group (UNVA: -0.02 ± 0.06, P < 0.001) showed improvement in binocular uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA). Additionally, Mixed group exhibited lower MTF10 (MTF10: 0.38 ± 0.24) and point spread function (PSF: 0.192 ± 0.269) results in their non-dominant eye compared to both Micro monovision group (MTF10: 0.56 ± 0.21, P = 0.027; PSF: 0.417 ± 0.282, P = 0.034) and Non-micro monovision group (MTF10: 0.55 ± 0.19, P = 0.038; PSF: 0.408 ± 0.285, P = 0.003). Spectacle independence for near vision were higher in both the Micro monovision (45%) and Mixed (55%) group compared to the Non-micro monovision group (40%). The Mixed group also reported higher incidence of photic phenomena (25%). However, there were no significant differences in stereoscopic function among the three groups.
conclusionBoth micro monovision and mix-and-match methods can help patients to obtain better visual outcomes at different distances. Mix-and-match method has better near visual acuity, while micro monovision method has better intermediate visual acuity. Non-micro monovision methods will affect patients' near vision outcomes. Binocularly implanted EDOF IOL has better contrast sensitivity. CLINICAL
trial registrationRegistration date:11/07/2023. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2300073433. TRIAL REGISTRY: West China Hospital of Sichuan University retrospectively registered.
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.