Panoptix Intraocular Lens Versus Symfony Intraocualar Lens

To compare the visual performance of bilateral (B/L)implantation of diffractive trifocal intraocular lens and extended depth of focus intraocular lens (IOL) in terms of  visual outcomes and internal aberrations.

The Eyefoundation hospital, a tertiary Eye care hospital in Southern India

Prospective, non-randomised, comparative study  including a total of 32 patients (64 eyes) with 16 patients (32 eyes) in each arm. Patients had bilateral implantation of a trifocal IOL (Panoptix-TNFT00) or extended-range-of-vision IOL (Symfony-ZXR00).Postoperative examinations done at 6 weeks and 3 months included assessing distance, intermediate, and near visual acuity, binocular defocus curve, intraocular and total aberrations, point-spread function(PSF), modulation transfer function (MTF) and quality-of-vision (QoV) and spectacle-dependence questionnaires.

Sixteen patients (32 eyes) in each arm (32 patients, 64 eyes) completed the outcome assessment. At 3-month follow-up, the trifocal group had significantly better UCNVA (0±0.0 logMAR)  than the extended-range-of-vision group (0.06 ± 0.1 logMAR) (p=0.003). The defocus curve at 6 weeks showed that visual acuity was significantly better with Panoptix IOL than with the extended-range-of-vision IOL from -2.5 to - 3.0 D(p=0.001). Intergroup comparison of the total higher-order aberrations, PSF and MTF were not statistically different. The QoV questionnaire showed no significant differences in dysphotopsia between the groups.

Trifocal IOL fared better in providing better near visual acuity without any compromise in the quality of vision in comparison to EDOF lenses. The subjective dysphotopic symptoms were low in both groups without hampering daily activities of the patient.