ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
Objective Evaluation and Comparison of Diffractive versus Refractive Phakic Intraocular Lenses for Presbyopia Correction.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Real-World Two-Year Outcomes of Diffractive Implantable Phakic Contact Lenses in Presbyopic Myopes: Functional Vision, Anatomical Findings, and Environmental Context.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Phakic intraocular lenses (IOLs) have newly been introduced for presbyopia correction, with no studies to date directly comparing the various models to one another. This study assesses and compares the optical quality of two phakic IOLs - a diffractive IPCL (Care Group) with +2.5D added power and a refractive Artiplus (Ophtec) - in a laboratory setting. Methods: A custom-made insert contained a -3D phakic IOL and a 23D monofocal (Precizon Monofocal, Ophtec). Two samples of each phakic IOL were tested using OptiSpheric IOL PRO2 under spherical and chromatic-aberration conditions at 3 and 4.5mm apertures at near (40cm), intermediate (67cm) and far distances. Modulation transfer function (MTF) related variables, and the 1951 USAF resolution target images were compared. Results: The MTFs at far distances, 67cm, and 40cm revealed minor differences between the two IOLs for a 3-mm pupil. Simulated visual acuity showed no disparity at distance but improved by 0.01 and 0.05 logMAR with Artiplus at intermediate and near points. Additionally, Artiplus exhibited a plateau in intermediate performance, while the IPCL demonstrated higher optical quality close to 50cm, corresponding to its secondary-focus location. Both lenses showed reduced optical quality with larger apertures. The USAF resolution target results supported these findings. Conclusion: Artiplus and IPCL (+2.5D add) showed good optical quality across the focus range, with Artiplus having a flatter simulated defocus curve. While the expected visual acuity differences were minimal, they may become more pronounced in patients with larger pupils, warranting further investigation.
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.