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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nagy et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: