ESCRS - PP13.17 - Visual Performance Of Negative Versus Neutral Aspheric Monofocal Intraocular Lenses In Light And Dark Conditions: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Visual Performance Of Negative Versus Neutral Aspheric Monofocal Intraocular Lenses In Light And Dark Conditions: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Published 2025 - 43rd Congress of the ESCRS

Reference: PP13.17 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/0dwt-5952

Authors: Martin Bechmann* 1 , Abdelrahman Assaf 2 , Amir Javadi 1 , Nikolaus Feucht 3 , Klio Becker 1

1Ophtalmology,Smile Eyes,Munich,Germany, 2Ophtalmology,Smile Eyes,Munich,Germany;Technical University of Munich,Munich,Germany, 3Ophtalmology,Smile Eyes,Munich,Germany;Ophtalmology,Technical University of Munich,Munich,Germany

Purpose

To compare the binocular distance (4m), intermediate (66 cm), and near (40 cm) visual acuity (VA) of the Johnson & Johnson Eyhance (DIB00) and Bausch & Lomb enVista (MX60E) intraocular lenses (IOL) in photopic and mesopic conditions.

Setting

One university based and one private practice based outpatient clinic

Methods

This multi-center, prospective, patient-and-assessor-masked, randomized controlled trial includes adult patients with ≤ 1.0 D of against-the-rule or ≤ 1.5 D of with-the-rule/oblique corneal astigmatism. We anticipate 80 bilaterally implanted patients (40 per group). Each subject is randomized to receive the same lens (either DIB00 or MX60E) in both eyes. The primary endpoints are best-distance corrected intermediate (DCIVA) and near (DCNVA) vision under photopic and mesopic conditions at 1-month.

Results

To date, 74 subjects have enrolled, and 54 have completed final follow-up. There was no difference in the binocular mean best-corrected visual acuity (BCDVA; p=0.85). In photopic conditions, Eyhance (0.18 ± 0.14) trended toward improved binocular DCIVA than enVista (0.23 ± 0.12; p=0.183). In mesopic conditions, there was no difference in the DCIVA (p=0.598), and enVista trended toward improved DCNVA (Eyhance: 0.41 ± 0.15 vs. enVista: 0.38 ± 0.09; p=0.366). Similar trends were observed for monocular photopic DCIVA (Eyhance: 0.28 ± 0.15 vs. enVista: 0.34 ± 0.13; p = 0.090) and mesopic DCNVA (Eyhance: 0.51 ± 0.13 vs. enVista: 0.46 ± 0.11; p = 0.081).

Conclusions

Interim results suggest that Eyhance may deliver improved intermediate vision in bright light conditions, but enVista might deliver improved near vision in low-light conditions. Enrollment is 77% complete and we anticipate further follow-up will elucidate significant relationships.