ArticleBiomedical optics express2025
Optical and simulated visual outcomes of two presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses tested in clinically relevant decentration and tilt conditions.
Article in Biomedical optics express, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Early Real-World Outcomes with a Novel Hybrid Full Range of Vision Intraocular Lens.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Optical Performance of RayOne EMV and Tecnis Synergy Under Varying Pupil Sizes and Corneal Aberrations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Optical and simulated visual outcomes of two presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses tested in clinically relevant decentration and tilt conditions.Biomedical optics express · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated the effect of intraocular lens (IOL) misalignment on image quality under clinically relevant conditions (0.2, 0.4 mm decentration and 2°, 4° tilt). Two presbyopia-correcting IOLs, an extended depth of focus (EDOF) (Alcon Vivity) and a diffractive multifocal (Alcon PanOptix), were tested. Through-focus modulation transfer function (MTF)-based measures were taken using an on-bench model eye with average corneal spherical aberration and apertures of 3.0 and 4.5 mm. Optical image quality and simulated visual acuity (VA) were assessed for both aligned and misaligned IOLs. The aligned EDOF lens showed superior distance vision quality compared to the multifocal, particularly with the 4.5 mm pupil. The EDOF lens was, however, more sensitive to decentration than the multifocal, which showed very low sensitivity across far, intermediate, and near regions with both apertures. Degradation with IOL tilt occurred at a slower rate than with decentration. Despite the optical degradation produced by mild misalignment (up to 0.4 mm decentration and 4° tilt), the predicted VA demonstrates that these effects should be negligible on postoperative vision with a 3 mm pupil. This holds true not only at a far distance, but also at the relevant intermediate and near foci.
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.