Comparison of visual and refractive outcomes between hydrophilic and hydrophobic trifocal intraocular lenses sharing the same optical design.
J Cataract Refract Surg 2020;
45:553-561. [PMID:
31030774 DOI:
10.1016/j.jcrs.2018.11.034]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2018] [Revised: 11/22/2018] [Accepted: 11/29/2018] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE
To compare clinical outcomes between two trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs): the new FineVision POD F GF trifocal IOL made of hydrophobic acrylic glistening-free material, and the FineVision POD F IOL made of hydrophilic acrylic material with 26% water uptake in patients undergoing routine cataract surgery using standard phacoemulsification.
SETTING
Semmelweis University, Department of Ophthalmology, Budapest, Hungary.
DESIGN
Prospective controlled randomized single-center single-surgeon study.
METHODS
Each patient had the hydrophilic POD F IOL implanted in one eye and the hydrophobic POD F GF IOL in the contralateral eye, according to a randomization table. Clinical outcomes included distance (4 m), intermediate (70 cm), and near (35 cm) visual acuities, contrast sensitivity measured under photopic and mesopic conditions, and defocus curves under photopic conditions. The follow-up was 6 months.
RESULTS
The study comprised 25 patients. Under photopic conditions, there was no statistically significant difference between POD F GF and POD F IOLs for uncorrected distance (UDVA) (P = .607), uncorrected intermediate (UIVA) (P = .491), and uncorrected near (UNVA) (P = .414) visual acuities. Under mesopic conditions, there was no statistically significant differences between the 2 IOLs for UDVA (P = 1.00), UIVA (P = .149), and UNVA (P = .551). No statistically significant differences in contrast sensitivity were found between the groups under photopic (P = .4347) and mesopic (P = .425) conditions. No safety issues were reported.
CONCLUSION
The study demonstrated equally good visual and refractive outcomes for the POD F GF IOL and the POD F IOL, giving the surgeon the option to choose the preferred material for the individual patient without compromising clinical outcomes.
Collapse