Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38918765›Full record

Observational studyBMC ophthalmology2024

Clinical results with a multifocal intraocular lens with a novel optical design.

Gustavo Goldman

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Presbyopia Correction in Lens Replacement Surgery: A Review.Clinical & experimental ophthalmology · 2025
    Review
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

1 author.

Gustavo GoldmanOphthalmological practice Dr. Goldman, Teodoro Garcia 2099, Piso 2, Buenos Aires, 1426, Argentina. glaukomdr@aol.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo evaluate the optical performance and safety of a new multifocal lens with a novel optical design featuring two additional foci (or intensifiers) in patients with cataract and presbyopia.

methodsIn this single-center, non-randomized prospective observational study, 31 patients underwent implantation of the new multifocal IOL between March 2020 and November 2021 at a tertiary clinical center in Buenos Aires and Ramos Mejia, Argentina. Postoperative examinations with emphasis on uncorrected and corrected visual acuity at distance and near and at two different intermediate distances (80 cm and 60 cm) were performed during the 3 postoperative months.

resultsOf the 31 patients who underwent implantation of the new IOL, 30 underwent bilateral surgery (61 eyes in total). At 3 months, all 61 eyes had an uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCDVA) of at least 0.15 logMAR; 57 eyes (93%) had an uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCDVA) of 0.1 logMAR and 27 eyes (44%) had an UCDVA of 0.0 logMAR. At 80 cm, 60 eyes (98%) had an uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UCIVA) of at least 0.1 log MAR and 48 eyes (79%) had an UCIVA of 0.0 logMAR.

conclusionThe new multifocal IOL with a novel optical concept (5 foci) showed a wide range of visual acuity especially at intermediate and near distances in patients undergoing cataract surgery. Uncorrected visual acuity was excellent at all tested distances, monocularly and binocularly, spectacle independence and patient satisfaction were high.

Indexed as

Multifocal Intraocular LensesPresbyopiaProsthesis DesignVisual AcuityAgedAged, 80 and overCataractFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLenses, IntraocularLens Implantation, IntraocularMaleMiddle AgedPhacoemulsificationProspective StudiesCataractDysphotopsiaEndothelial cell density (ECD)Intraocular lens (IOL)Presbyopia

Identifiers

PMID38918765
PMCPMC11201358

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.