ArticleInternational ophthalmology2025
A comparative evaluation of visual, refractive, and patient-reported outcomes of four premium intraocular lenses.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early Real-World Outcomes with a Novel Hybrid Full Range of Vision Intraocular Lens.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Early Visual Performance and Subjective Experience After Bilateral Implantation of a Novel Fully Refractive Extended Depth of Focus Intraocular Lens.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCompare visual, refractive, optical performance, and patient-reported measures in cases implanted with one premium IOL: Precizon Presbyopic NVA, AT Lisa Tri 839, Acrysof IQ Vivity, and TECNIS Eyhance ICB00.
methodsProspective, comparative clinical study of 100 eyes of 100 patients: Visual acuity, refraction, slitlamp biomicroscopy, defocus curve, ocular aberrations, point spread function, pupil size, contrast sensitivity, and quality of vision were evaluated at 6 months. 79 eyes with Vivity were analyzed for correlations between postoperative near vision and preoperative/postoperative parameters.
resultsPostoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity for Precizon, Vivity, AT Lisa, and Eyhance were 0.04, 0.11, 0.02, and 0.07 logMAR, respectively. AT Lisa showed superior aberrometric performance and defocus curve with better near vision. Vivity had better retinal image quality and contrast, exceling in intermediate vision. Precizon excelled in near vision. Vivity had better Quality of vision scores; where 16% achieved uncorrected near vision ≤ 0.1, 72% > 0.1 to < 0.4, and 8% ≥ 0.4 logMAR, with no significant predictors.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that the varied performance of premium IOLs may benefit from personalized selection based on patient goals and expectations. Differences in subjective visual quality highlight the need to manage expectations, particularly with EDOF lenses. However, conclusions should be interpreted with caution due to methodological limitations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41003836What 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.