Different Optical Designs, Similar Clinical Outcomes: Six-Month Results Of Three Full-Range Vision Iols

To compare six-month visual acuity, refractive outcomes, ocular aberrometric outcomes, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) among three full-range vision intraocular lenses with distinct optical designs: Gemetric (HOYA Surgical Optics; anterior surface diffractive), Asqelio Trifocal (AST Products; posterior surface diffractive), and Galaxy (Rayner; non-diffractive spiral optic). The objective was to determine whether differences in optical architecture translate into clinically meaningful differences in functional performance.

Single tertiary referral center. All procedures were performed using standard phacoemulsification with in-the-bag IOL implantation. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated at one, three and six months.

Prospective consecutive case series including 143 eyes implanted with Gemetric (n=54), Asqelio Trifocal (n=46), or Galaxy (n=43). Postoperative evaluations were performed at 1, 3, and 6 months and included UDVA, CDVA, UIVA, CDIVA, UNVA, and CNVA, as well as refractive outcomes and addition. Aberrometric assessment comprised LOAs, HOAs, coma, trefoil, SA, and PSF. PROMs were evaluated in a subgroup of patients who completed the validated Quality of Vision (QoV) questionnaire. Intergroup comparisons were performed using Kruskal–Wallis testing (p<0.05). Definitive six-month outcomes for the complete study cohort will be presented at the meeting.

Preliminary outcomes including 1- and 3-month data, as well as available six-month follow-up, showed comparable UDVA, CDVA, and UIVA among groups (p>0.05). Statistically significant differences were observed in selected near visual acuity parameters (CNVA LogMAR p=0.003; CDIVA LogMAR p<0.001) and SA (p<0.001). No significant differences were detected in refractive outcomes, addition, LOAs, HOAs, or PSF (all p>0.05). PROM analysis (QoV subgroup) revealed no statistically significant intergroup differences in frequency, severity, or bothersomeness (all p>0.05). Definitive six-month outcomes for the complete study cohort will be presented at the meeting.

Preliminary outcomes demonstrated that, despite distinct optical designs, the three full-range vision IOLs achieved comparable visual, refractive, aberrometric, and PROMs results. Variations observed in selected near parameters and SA did not translate into clinically meaningful differences in patient-reported visual quality or measurable performance metrics across platforms. These findings suggest that, in contemporary full-range IOLs, optical geometry alone may not fully account for real-world clinical performance. Definitive six-month outcomes will be presented at the meeting.