Bilateral Comparison Of Clinical Outcomes After Implantation Of Two Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lenses: Tecnis Eyhance Versus Ophtec Precizon Go
Published 2026 - 44th Congress of the ESCRS
Reference: POCAT429 | Type: Poster | DOI: 10.82333/329b-g934
Authors: Dr Sangwon Han 1 , Prof. Dr Sun Woong Kim* 1
1ophthalmology,yonsei university wonju college of medicine,wonju,Korea, Republic Of
Purpose
To compare the clinical outcomes of two enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses, Eyhance and Precizon Go, implanted contralaterally in the same patients.
Setting
Yonsei Univerisity Wonju Severance Chrisitan Hospital, Wonju, South Korea
Methods
This retrospective study analyzed the medical records of 30 patients (60 eyes) who underwent bilateral cataract surgery between March 2024 and September 2025. Each patient received a Eyhance (Johnson & Johnson Vision) in one eye and a Precizon Go (Ophtec) in the fellow eye. Uncorrected distant visual acuity (UCDVA), best-corrected distant visual acuity (BCDVA), and spherical equivalent (SE) were measured at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. At 3 months, uncorrected intermediate (UCIVA, 66 cm) and near (UCNVA, 40 cm) visual acuities, defocus curves, contrast sensitivity, and patient satisfaction via questionnaires were compared.
Results
At 3 months postoperatively, mean UCDVA (logMAR) was 0.08 ± 0.13 in the Eyhance group and 0.04± 0.13 in the Precizon Go group, with no statistically significant difference (p=0.152). UCIVA and UCNVA also showed no significant difference (p>0.05). Repeated measures ANOVA revealed no significant interaction between lens type and defocus levels (p>0.05). However, the Eyhance group showed numerically better visual acuity at -1.00 D and -1.50 D defocus levels (p=0.005, p=0.012 uncorrected), but failed to reach statistical significance after multiple comparison correction. Contrast sensitivity, dysphotopsia scores (glare, halo, starburst) and lens preference showed no significant differences between groups.
Conclusions
Although two IOLs with different optical designs were implanted bilaterally in the same patients, they demonstrated comparable distance and intermediate visual outcomes without any clinical adverse events. These findings indicate that diverse optical designs of enhanced monofocal IOLs are clinically compatible, suggesting options in IOL selection for surgeons.