ArticleInternational ophthalmology2024
Visual performance and patient preference with bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus or combined implantation of an extended depth of focus/trifocal intraocular lens.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05462067 (Visual Performance of Patients With Either Bilateral Implantation of the ZEISS AT LARA or the ZEISS AT LARA in One Eye and ZEISS AT LISA Tri in the Other), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Visual Performance of Patients With Either Bilateral Implantation of the ZEISS AT LARA or the ZEISS AT LARA in One Eye and ZEISS AT LISA Tri in the Other (Presbyopia IOL Concept Evaluation).
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEvaluate postoperative visual performance in patients with bilaterally implanted AT LARA or AT LARA/AT LISA tri (Carl Zeiss AG, Jena, Germany) intraocular lenses.
methodsMulticentered, comparative, open-label, retrospective/prospective study. Post-IOL implantation, patients were prospectively enrolled into this study; preoperative patient data were collected retrospectively. Follow-up was at 2-4 and 5-8 months post-surgery. The primary endpoint was binocular best corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA). The study was retrospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT05462067).
resultsSeventy-one patients (142 eyes) were enrolled; 67 patients (134 eyes) have 5-8 months data. The mean binocular CDVA at 2-4 months was -0.10 ± 0.06 logMAR in the bilateral AT LARA group ("bilateral") and -0.11 ± 0.09 logMAR in the combined implantation AT LARA/ AT LISA tri group ("combined implantation"); (P = 0.4856). At 5-8 months, mean binocular CDVA was -0.13 ± 0.06 logMAR in the bilateral group and -0.11 ± 0.09 in the combined implantation group (P = 0.4003). At 5-8 months, more eyes in the bilateral group attained 0.2 logMAR or better binocular uncorrected intermediate VA (UIVA; 67 cm) than those in the combined implantation group (100% vs. 94%, respectively). The bilateral group achieved a mean of 0.24 ± 0.11 logMAR in uncorrected near VA (UCNVA), compared to a mean of 0.16 ± 0.12 logMAR in the combined implantation group at 5-8 months (P = 0.0041).
conclusionsA combined implantation approach (AT LARA in the distance dominant eye/AT LISA tri in the non-dominant eye) produced similar CDVA outcomes but better UCNVA as bilateral implantation with the AT LARA. UIVA was comparable between groups. No new safety concerns were reported.
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.