Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Clinical comparison of patient outcomes following implantation of trifocal or bifocal intraocular lenses: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Clinical comparison of patient outcomes following implantation of trifocal or bifocal intraocular lenses: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Clinical comparison of patient outcomes following implantation of trifocal or bifocal intraocular lenses: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Clinical comparison of patient outcomes following implantation of trifocal or bifocal intraocular lenses: a systematic review and meta-analysis
2017
Overview
To assess the visual effects of trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) compared to bifocal IOLs in cataract surgery, a meta-analysis of prospective comparative clinical trials (including 4 randomized controlled trials and 4 cohorts) was conducted. The defocus curves showed a better distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (VA) for the trifocal group (MD −0.07; 95% CI, −0.10 to −0.05;
p
< 0.00001), while the VA outcomes showed no significant difference in distance VA (MD −0.03; 95% CI, −0.06 to 0.01;
p
= 0.13 for uncorrected distance VA and MD −0.00; 95% CI, −0.01 to 0.01;
p
= 0.78 for distance-corrected distance VA), near VA (MD −0.01; 95% CI, −0.07 to 0.04;
p
= 0.68 for uncorrected near VA and MD −0.01; 95% CI, −0.06 to 0.04;
p
= 0.66 for distance-corrected near VA) or refraction between the two groups. Contrast sensitivity and subjective visual quality yielded less conclusive results. Overall, a patient may achieve better intermediate VA with a trifocal IOL than with a bifocal IOL without any adverse effect on distance or near VA. The findings on contrast sensitivity and subjective visual quality were heterogeneous, with no clear results favoring either option.
Publisher
Nature Publishing Group UK,Nature Publishing Group
