Comprasion Of Refractive Edof And Diffactive Trifocal Iols
Published 2025 - 43rd Congress of the ESCRS
Reference: PO371 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/88qd-e704
Authors: Nanji Lu* 1 , Robert Herber 2 , Ioannis Aslanides 3 , Le-Le Cui 4 , Jos Rozema 5
1West China Hospital, Sichuan University,Chengdu,China, 2University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus,Dresden,Germany, 3Emmetropia Mediterranean Eye Institute,Heraklion,Greece, 4Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University,Wenzhou,China, 5University of Antwerp,Antwerp,Belgium
Purpose
To compare the performance of refractive extended depth of focus (EDoF) and diffractive trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) in terms of distance and near visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, defocus curve, and difficulty in night driving.
Setting
Clinical setting
Methods
This study included 20 patients implanted bilaterally with the Lucidis EDoF IOL and 28 patients implanted bilaterally with the Panoptix Clareon trifocal IOL. Patients with amblyopia or unilateral implantation were excluded. All surgeries were performed at Venividi Eye Center by different surgeons. Three months postoperatively, all patients underwent assessments for distance and near visual acuity, contrast sensitivity (measured with LCD-1000/1000P), defocus curve and night driving difficulty (assessed using the NEI-VFQ-25 questionnaire). Seven patients in the Lucidis group (35%) and two patients in the Clareon group (7.1%) underwent Nd:YAG capsulotomy for posterior capsular opacification (PCO) before evaluation.
Results
The Lucidis EDoF IOL demonstrated superior performance in distance vision, defocus curve at +1.50D and +0.50D (p < 0.05), contrast sensitivity at 1.5–3 cpd (p < 0.05). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in near vision (p > 0.05) or night driving difficulty (p = 0.204, p > 0.05). However, PCO incidence was significantly higher in the Lucidis group (p = 0.039, p < 0.05).
Conclusions
Both the Lucidis EDoF IOL and Clareon trifocal IOL provided satisfactory near and distance visual outcomes with comparable night driving performance. However, Lucidis performed better in distance vision (defocus at +1.50D and +0.50D) and contrast sensitivity at lower spatial frequencies (1.5–3 cpd). Despite these advantages, a significantly higher rate of PCO and Nd:YAG capsulotomy was observed in the Lucidis group, which may impact long-term patient satisfaction and postoperative management. These findings suggest that while Lucidis EDoF IOL provides better distance and contrast vision, the higher PCO incidence should be considered when selecting IOLs for patients.