Comparison of visual function and patient-reported outcomes between two full range of field intraocular lenses: a randomized controlled study.

PURPOSE: To compare visual and patient-reported outcomes in patients with cataracts bilaterally implanted with PanOptix or Synergy intraocular lenses (IOLs).

SETTINGS: 5 sites in the United States.

DESIGN

Prospective, parallel-arm randomized patient-masked and examiner-masked clinical study.

METHODS

Adult patients with cataract (≥22 years) were randomized (1:1) to receive bilateral PanOptix or Synergy IOL implantation. Study endpoints: binocular uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) (logMAR) at distance, intermediate (60 cm), and near (40 and 33 cm); defocus curve; patient-reported visual disturbances, spectacle independence, and visual satisfaction using questionnaires at 6 months; and binocular contrast sensitivity at 3 months.

RESULTS

At 6 months, PanOptix (n = 138) was noninferior to Synergy (n = 138) IOLs for photopic binocular UDVA and CDVA at all tested distances ( P < .05). Mesopic intermediate and near VA showed a similar trend. Defocus curves showed that both IOLs provided VA of ≤0.1 logMAR from -2.50 to +0.50 diopters (D) and <0.2 logMAR at -3.00 D. A significantly lower proportion of patients with PanOptix (vs Synergy) experienced starbursts and glare ( P < .05). Most patients in both groups reported never/rarely needing spectacles to see and high satisfaction with vision. Both IOLs provided similar binocular contrast sensitivity at 3 months under photopic and mesopic conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

PanOptix IOLs provided a similar full range of vision, spectacle independence, and contrast sensitivity, but superior tolerance to glare and starbursts, compared with Synergy IOLs.