Trial reportBMC ophthalmology2025
Comparing postoperative reading performance and visual outcomes of a non-diffractive EDOF-IOL versus a monofocal IOL: a randomized controlled eye movement study.
Trial report in BMC ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05194657 (Assessment of Reading Performance in Patients With Acrysof IQ Vivity Toric or Non-toric vs Monofocal Acrysof IQ Toric or Non-toric IOL), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Assessment of Reading Performance in Patients With Acrysof IQ Vivity Toric or Non-toric vs Monofocal Acrysof IQ Toric or Non-toric IOL
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundTo compare oculomotor behavior and reading performance along with conventional visual outcomes in patients following implantation of an enhanced depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) versus a monofocal IOL.
methodsIn this prospective, exploratory, randomized, clinical trial patients underwent either bilateral implantation with a non-diffractive EDOF IOL DFT015 (Acrysof IQ Vivity, Alcon, USA) or an aspheric monofocal IOL SN60WF (Acrysof IQ, Alcon, USA). 106 eyes of 53 patients with bilateral age-related cataract were evaluated (EDOF IOL group: n = 25; Monofocal IOL group n = 28). At 3 months after surgery, along with visual acuity at various distances, halometry, and patient-reported quality of vision, silent reading performance and oculomotor behavior were assessed at 66 cm with an infrared eye tracker under photopic and mesopic light levels. Data analysis included computation of reading speed and a range of oculomotor indices.
resultsMedian mesopic silent reading speed in words per minute (wpm) and fixation duration in milliseconds (ms) were 205 wpm and 277 ms for the EDOF group and 168 wpm (p = 0.04) and 301 ms (p = 0.02) for the monofocal control IOL group, respectively. No significant differences were observed under photopic conditions. Binocular means expressed in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution for postoperative corrected distance, uncorrected distance, uncorrected intermediate, and uncorrected near visual acuities were - 0.04 ± 0.07, 0.00 ± 0.07, 0.12 ± 0.09, and 0.27 ± 0.13 for the EDOF group and - 0.08 ± 0.06 (p = 0.08), -0.04 ± 0.07 (p = 0.10), 0.19 ± 0.13 (p = 0.01), and 0.41 ± 0.14 (p = < 0.001) for the control group, respectively. Postoperative halo size and visual disturbances were similar in both groups.
conclusionsSilent reading speed at 66 cm distance is found improved with EDOF compared to monofocal IOLs only at mesopic light levels, mainly due to the improvement in average fixation duration. Further studies are needed to confirm these preliminary findings.
trial registrationJan 4, 2022: NCT05194657 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05194657 ).
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.