ArticleBMC ophthalmology2026
Refractive outcomes and biometric prediction accuracy following Optiflex Trio trifocal intraocular lens implantation.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo assess the refractive performance and predictive reliability of four commonly used intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas in eyes receiving the Optiflex Trio lens.
methodsThis retrospective analysis included 554 eyes of 348 individuals who underwent phacoemulsification followed by Optiflex Trio IOL implantation for either visually significant cataracts or refractive lens exchange. Preoperative and postoperative measurements including refraction, keratometry, and visual acuity, were reviewed. The prediction errors generated by the SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Barrett Universal II, and Haigis-L formulae were compared.
resultsParticipants had a mean age of 61.46 ± 9.87 years. Cataract removal occurred in 481 eyes (86.8%), whereas 73 eyes (13.2%) underwent refractive lens exchange. The spherical equivalent (SE) changed from a preoperative value of + 0.21 ± 2.71 D to − 0.31 ± 0.56 D postoperatively (p < 0.001). After surgery, 44.2% of eyes were within ± 0.25 D of the target refraction, 70.2% within ± 0.50 D, and 92.1% within ± 1.00 D. All formulas showed a tendency to produce hyperopic predictions relative to actual postoperative outcomes (p < 0.001). Although the mean prediction errors did not differ significantly among formulas (p = 0.712), threshold-based analysis demonstrated meaningful differences at ± 0.25 D and ± 0.50 D (p = 0.024 and p < 0.001, respectively). Across all benchmarks, the Barrett Universal II formula yielded the highest proportion of eyes that met the specified accuracy level.
conclusionsIn this large Optiflex Trio IOL cohort, more than 90% of the eyes achieved postoperative refractions within ± 1.00 D. Although the overall accuracy was comparable across formulas, Barrett Universal II provided superior precision at narrower tolerance limits, supporting its preferential use for IOL power calculation.
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.