Background and aims To evaluate the objective and subjective optical quality of all optic zone diffractive multifocal intraocular lens (IOL).
Methods Fifty patients (50 eyes) having phacoemulsification and IOL implantation surgery were enrolled. 25 patients were implanted with all optic zone diffractive multifocal IOL and 25 patients with monofocal IOL. Objective optical quality parameters under 4 mm pupil using Optical Quality Analysis System (OQAS), subjective visual acuity (VA) at 85 cd/m2 luminance and questionnaire concerning halo and visual function were assessed.
Results The multifocal group gained similar objective optical outcomes, such as OQAS values at contrast 100%, 20%, 9%, modulation transfer function cut-off and Strehl ratio, as the monofocal group. Objective scatter index (OSI) was significantly better in the monofocal group. Distance corrected near VA, uncorrected near VA, distance corrected intermediate VA and uncorrected intermediate VA were significantly better in the multifocal group. The difference in uncorrected distance VA and best corrected distance VA between the monofocal and multifocal groups was not significant. Mild halos and glare were reported in both groups and a significant difference between the two groups was not observed; however, moderate glare and halos were reported only in the multifocal group (2/25). There was no significant difference between the two groups when visual function was compared.
Conclusions All optic zone diffractive multifocal IOLs provided almost the same objective optical quality as monofocal IOLs did under 4 mm pupil besides good all distance visual performance, but with greater OSI, indicating that implantation provides good optical quality in daytime but with more intraocular scatter light.
Trial registration number NCT02234635, post-results.
- Clinical Trial
- Optics and Refraction
- Lens and zonules
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors JL had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Study concept and design: JL and TC. Acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data: all authors. Drafting of the manuscript: FY and HL. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: all authors. Statistical analysis: YZ and PC. Technical support: QZ and LL. Study supervision: JL.
Funding Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province, China (Grant No LY13H120005) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No 81200672).
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent Obtained.
Ethics approval The institutional review board and ethics committee of Wenzhou Medical University.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data sharing statement Data from our research are available to anyone online.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.