Comparison of clinical performance between trifocal and bifocal intraocular lenses: A meta-analysis

To compare the clinical performance between trifocal and bifocal intraocular lenses in bilateral cataract and/or refractive lens exchange (RLE) surgery. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and Web of Science was performed through October 2016 to i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:PloS one 2017-10, Vol.12 (10), p.e0186522-e0186522
Main Authors: Xu, Zequan, Cao, Danmin, Chen, Xu, Wu, Song, Wang, Xin, Wu, Qiang
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Acuity
Bias
Biology and Life Sciences
Cataract Extraction
Cataracts
Clinical trials
Cohort analysis
Comparative analysis
Complications
Contrast Sensitivity
Cylinders
Eye (anatomy)
Eye lens
Eye surgery
Hospitals
Humans
Intraocular lenses
Lens Implantation, Intraocular
Lenses, Intraocular
Medicine and Health Sciences
Meta-analysis
Patient outcomes
Patient Satisfaction
People and Places
Physical Sciences
Physiological aspects
Postoperative Complications
Presbyopia
Quality
Research and Analysis Methods
Social Sciences
Studies
Surgery
Visual Acuity
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To compare the clinical performance between trifocal and bifocal intraocular lenses in bilateral cataract and/or refractive lens exchange (RLE) surgery. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and Web of Science was performed through October 2016 to identify randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative cohort studies. The primary outcomes were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UIVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), defocus curve, spectacle independence, patient satisfaction and contrast sensitivity. The secondary outcomes were residual sphere, spherical equivalent (SE), cylinder and complications. Six RCTs and 2 cohort studies including 568 eyes (278 in the trifocal group and 290 in the bifocal group) were identified. There was a statically significant difference between the two groups in UDVA (WMD: -0.03, 95% CI: -0.05 to -0.01, P = 0.005), but the difference (0.03 log MAR) is not clinically significant. Intermediate visual acuity was better in the trifocal IOL group judging from UIVA and defocus curves. There was a statically significant difference between the two groups in residual cylinder (WMD: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.20, P = 0.02), and subgroup AT Lisa tri 839MP trifocal also showed significant better UNVA than bifocal IOLs (WMD: -0.13, 95% CI: -0.17 to -0.08, P
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0186522