Comparison of 3-month visual outcomes of a spherical and a toric trifocal intraocular lens.

PURPOSE: To evaluate visual outcomes and satisfaction after implantation of 2 trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs): a spherical IOL and a toric IOL.

SETTING

IOA Madrid Innova Ocular, Madrid, Spain.

DESIGN

Prospective, controlled clinical trial.

METHODS

Patients (>50 years) were implanted bilaterally with either a trifocal spherical hydrophilic IOL (FineVision POD F) if corneal astigmatism was 1.0 diopter (D) or less, or with a trifocal toric hydrophilic IOL (FineVision POD FT) if astigmatism was more than 1.0 D. Outcomes analyzed 3 months after surgery included monocular and binocular visual acuities at distance, near, and intermediate, both uncorrected and corrected. Defocus curves, contrast sensitivity, and patient satisfaction were also assessed.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between groups in monocular uncorrected distance (UDVA) (P = .38), monocular corrected distance (CDVA) (P = .22), or distance-corrected intermediate (DCIVA) (P = .95) visual acuities; however, the distance-corrected near visual acuity (DCNVA) was slightly better in the spherical IOL group (P = .008). The UDVA was 20/25 or better in 89% of eyes in the spherical IOL group and 93% in the toric IOL group. The DCIVA was 20/32 or better in 92% of eyes in the spherical IOL group and 93% in the toric IOL group at 80 cm (Radner Vissum chart), and 20/32 or better in 100% of eyes in both groups at 63 cm (Colenbrander chart). The DCNVA (Radner chart) was 20/32 or better in 89% of eyes in the spherical IOL group and 90% of eyes in the toric IOL group. There was no difference between the groups in contrast sensitivity, defocus curves, cylinder, or satisfaction results.

CONCLUSION

Patients had significant improvement in visual acuity and gained functional uncorrected visual acuity across all distances in both groups. Satisfaction was high with both IOLs.