Comparison of clinical outcomes with 2 small-incision diffractive multifocal intraocular lenses

PurposeTo evaluate and compare the clinical results of 2 diffractive multifocal small-incision intraocular lenses (IOLs) implanted after biaxial microincision cataract surgery (MICS).SettingAtatürk Training and Research Hospital, 2nd Ophthalmology Department, Ankara, Turkey.DesignComparative case series.MethodsEyes that had biaxial MICS with implantation of an Acri.Lisa 366D IOL (Group 1) or Acriva Reviol MFM 611 IOL (Group 2) were followed for at least 6 months postoperatively. Uncorrected distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA), and near (UNVA) visual acuities; corrected distance visual acuity; distance-corrected intermediate and near visual acuities; and contrast sensitivity measurements with and without glare were determined. Early and late complications and subjective complaints were recorded and evaluated.ResultsThe study enrolled 60 eyes of 32 patients. The preoperative and intraoperative data were comparable in the 2 IOL groups. There were no statistically significant postoperative differences in the mean spherical equivalent (Group 1, −0.30 diopter (D) ± 0.30 [SD]; Group 2, −0.26 ± 0.28 D; P=.584), mean UDVA (0.80 ± 0.14 and 0.86 ± 0.17, respectively; P=.158), and mean Jaeger UNVA (1.46 ± 0.73 and J 1.23 ± 0.50, respectively; P=.155). However, there was a significant difference in mean Jaeger UIVA (3.06 ± 0.90 and 2.23 ± 0.72, respectively; P=.000). Mesopic contrast sensitivity and the incidence of complications and dysphotopsia symptoms were not significantly different between the 2 IOL groups.ConclusionsBoth IOLs provided excellent distance and near visual acuity and contrast sensitivity. The Group 2 IOL gave better intermediate distance results.Financial DisclosureNo author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.