ArticleScientific reports2024
Comparison of visual performance between diffractive bifocal and diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in cataract surgery: is a new era on the horizon?Current opinion in ophthalmology · 2026Review
- An Update on Intraocular Lens Technology for Presbyopia Correction and Visual Outcomes.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Visual outcome of a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens in eyes with short axial length.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Observational
- Higher-order aberrations and visual outcomes of a new refractive extended depth-of-focus intraocular lens with a target of slight myopia.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Visual outcomes and quality of life after bilateral extended depth of field, bifocal, and mix-and-match IOL implantation.PloS one · 2026Observational
- Comparison of visual performance between monofocal and rotationally asymmetric refractive intraocular lenses.PloS one · 2025Article
- Secondary sulcus IOL implantation for presbyopia correction following Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty.American journal of ophthalmology case reports · 2024Article
- Comparison of visual outcomes in patients with cataracts and high myopia after implantation of a zonal refractive multifocal or diffractive bifocal intraocular lens.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comparative visual performance of ultraviolet light-filtering and violet light-filtering monofocal intraocular lenses of the same material and basic design.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Clinical results with a multifocal intraocular lens with a novel optical design.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Observational
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the visual performance of a diffractive bifocal intraocular lens (IOL) with + 4.0 D near addition (ZMB00) and a diffractive trifocal IOL with + 2.17 D and + 3.25 D near addition (AcrySof IQ PanOptix TFNT00), we investigated the 10-week postoperative parameters after cataract surgery in which ZMB00 or TFNT00 lenses were implanted bilaterally from 2011 to 2020 (with a 3-month interval between implantation of the right and left lenses). The study included 1448 eyes of 724 patients. The diffractive bifocal group comprised 1326 eyes of 663 patients (aged 67.0 ± 7.8 years; females/males, 518/145), and the diffractive trifocal group comprised 122 eyes of 61 patients (aged 66.6 ± 7.3 years; females/males, 35/26). A linear mixed-effects model using data for both eyes, with strict adjustments for sex, age, subjective refraction spherical equivalent, subjective refraction cylinder, corneal astigmatism, axial length, corneal higher-order aberrations, and pupil diameter, ensured statistical validity. Uncorrected near visual acuity and higher-order aberrations (ocular/internal, scaled to a pupil size of 4 mm) (Wavefront_4mm_postoperative_Ocular/Internal_Spherical) were significantly better in the bifocal group (p < 0.00068, Wald test). Uncorrected intermediate visual acuity, contrast sensitivity (6.3/4.0/2.5/1.6/1.0/0.7 degrees), and contrast sensitivity with glare (4.0/1.6/1.0/0.7 degrees) were significantly better in the trifocal group (p < 0.00068, Wald test).
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.