Comparison Between Bilateral Implantation of a Trifocal Intraocular Lens (Alcon Acrysof IQ® PanOptix) and Extended Depth of Focus Lens (Tecnis® Symfony® ZXR00 Lens)
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Purpose: To compare the visual performance outcomes following bilateral cataract surgery using trifocal intraocular lens (Alcon Acrysof IQ® PanOptix) and extended depth of focus lens (Tecnis® Symfony® ZXR00 lens).
Methods: In this prospective, non-randomized, comparative trial, a total of 40 subjects (80 eyes) were divided into two different groups and submitted to bilateral cataract surgery and implantation of the two different IOLs, Alcon Acrysof IQ® PanOptix® TNFT00 in group A and Tecnis® Symfony® ZXR00 lens (Johnson & Johnson Vision) in group B, was assessed. The uncorrected and corrected near (33 cm), intermediate (60 cm), and far (4 m) binocular visual acuity was measured, and visual binocular defocus curves were also measured in the photopic condition with a long-distance visual acuity and the qualitative visual function was assessed by NEI VFQ-25.
Results: Group A comprised 20 patients; 11 women (55%) and 9 men (45%) with a mean age of 62.1 ± 5.4. In group B 20 patients were recruited; 12 women (60%) and 8 men (40%) with a mean age of 63.2 ± 6.1. The postoperatively calculated mean sphere was + 0.35 ± 0.12 D and - 0.14 ± 0.13 D in groups A and B, respectively. The postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) as well as uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA) were statistically equal in both groups (P = 0.12, P = 0.17); meanwhile, the postoperative uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) was significantly better in patients with PanOptix IOL implantation (P = 0.01) compared to the binocular defocus curve; the results of the PanOptix group were better than the Symfony group in intermediate and near distance (P = 0.089, P = 0.001) and according to the VFQ-25 questionnaire, then ear vision score as well as sum score turned out to be significantly higher in groups A than B (P = 0.001 and P = 0.015, respectively).
Conclusion: Both strategies were able to provide good vision for far, intermediate and near distances.
Jeon W, Yoon C, Oh J, Choi H, Kim M BMC Ophthalmol. 2025; 25(1):82.
PMID: 39972278 PMC: 11837369. DOI: 10.1186/s12886-025-03912-4.
Labiris G, Bakirtzis M, Panagis C, Mitsi C, Vorgiazidou E, Konstantinidis A Clin Ophthalmol. 2025; 18():3935-3947.
PMID: 39790982 PMC: 11714096. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S487400.
Chen Q, Zhang G J Ophthalmol. 2024; 2024:5571802.
PMID: 39444423 PMC: 11496590. DOI: 10.1155/2024/5571802.
Mu J, Xiong T, Xu F, Guo W, Sun C, Chen H Front Med (Lausanne). 2024; 11:1462205.
PMID: 39247637 PMC: 11377219. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1462205.
Comparison of Two Presbyopia-Correcting Trifocal Intraocular Lenses: A Prospective Study.
Bayhan H, Tasci Y, Aslan Bayhan S, Takmaz T, Can I Turk J Ophthalmol. 2024; 54(2):63-68.
PMID: 38644781 PMC: 11034538. DOI: 10.4274/tjo.galenos.2024.27657.