ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
Bilateral Refractive Lens Exchange with a Hydrophobic Trifocal Intraocular Lens.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 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
Purpose: To evaluate the visual and refractive outcomes in patients who underwent bilateral refractive lens exchange (RLE) with the trifocal hydrophobic FineVision HP IOL. Methods: This prospective, single-center, non-comparative study enrolled 70 eyes of 35 patients implanted bilaterally with the FineVision HP IOL (Beaver-Visitec International, Inc. USA). Postoperative outcomes at 3 months included manifest refraction, monocular and binocular logMAR uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (DCIVA, at 60 cm), and distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA, at 40 cm). The binocular defocus curve was also registered. Results: 94.29% of eyes showed a spherical equivalent within ±0.50D and all within ±1.00D. 95.71% of eyes showed a refractive cylinder of ≤0.50D and all ≤1.00D. The mean spherical equivalent and refractive cylinder were 0.16 ± 0.27D and -0.18 ± 0.21D, respectively. Mean binocular CDVA, DCIVA and DCNVA were -0.12 ± 0.06, 0.15 ± 0.07 and 0.03 ± 0.05 logMAR, respectively. 88.57% and 100% of patients achieved a cumulative binocular CDVA of ≥20/16 and ≥20/20, respectively. Furthermore, 51.43% and 91.43% patients achieved a cumulative binocular DCIVA of ≥20/25 and ≥20/32, respectively; and 71.43% and 100% of patients achieved a cumulative binocular DCNVA of ≥20/20 and ≥20/25, respectively. The safety and efficacy indexes were 1.07 and 1.01, respectively. The defocus curve showed a peak of maximum visual acuity, better than 20/16, at distance, with a continuous smooth reduction in visual acuity for intermediate distances, followed by a secondary peak close to 20/20 at near. Conclusions: The FineVision HP IOL demonstrated favorable short-term refractive accuracy and visual performance in this prospective cohort, although larger comparative studies with longer follow-up are warranted.
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.