ESCRS - POCAT494 - Clinical Outcomes And Photic Disturbances With Bi-Aspheric Diffractive Trifocal Versus Non-Diffractive Phasering Edof Intraocular Lenses

Clinical Outcomes And Photic Disturbances With Bi-Aspheric Diffractive Trifocal Versus Non-Diffractive Phasering Edof Intraocular Lenses

Published 2026 - 44th Congress of the ESCRS

Reference: POCAT494 | Type: Poster | DOI: 10.82333/x0h7-nq08

Authors: Mrs Laura Mariñas García* 1 , Mr Laureano Alvarez-Rementeria Capelo 2 , Mr Javier Ruiz Alcocer 3 , Mrs Vanesa Blázquez 4

1Cataract,Rementeria Clinic,Madrid,Spain, 2Cataract and Refractive,Rementeria Clinic,Madrid,Spain, 3Optometry and Vision Department,Complutense University,Madrid,Spain, 4Optometry,Rementeria Clinic,Madrid,Spain

Purpose

The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare photic phenomena and visual performance in patients who underwent bilateral implantation of either a diffractive trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) or a non-diffractive extended depth-of-focus (EDoF) IOL.

Setting

Rementeria Clinic

Methods

Patients bilaterally implanted with either the diffractive Asqelio® Trifocal or the non-diffractive Asqelio® EDoF IOL were included. At 3 months postoperatively, monocular uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), monocular contrast visual acuity (100%, 50%, and 10%), and binocular defocus curves were evaluated. Photic phenomena were specifically analyzed. Halo perception was objectively assessed using a halometer, obtaining a discrimination index. Subjective dysphotopsias (halos and glare) and night driving difficulties were measured using a four-point Likert-scale questionnaire.

Results

Seventy-six eyes from 38 patients were analyzed (38 eyes with trifocal, 38 eyes with EDoF). Monocular UDVA was −0.04 ± 0.08 logMAR in the trifocal group and −0.01 ± 0.06 logMAR in the EDoF group (p = 0.10). Both groups showed decreased monocular visual acuity under lower contrast conditions, without statistically significant differences (p > 0.05). Defocus curves were comparable between +1.0 and −1.50 D; however, from −2.0 to −3.0 D, the trifocal group achieved significantly better visual acuity (p < 0.05). Halos were reported as “never” or “mild” by 63% of trifocal patients and 79% of EDoF patients. Night driving difficulties were minimal in 58% with trifocals and 69% with EDoF IOLs.

Conclusions

Both IOL models provided satisfactory visual outcomes at distance and intermediate ranges. The trifocal lens offered superior near visual acuity. Photic disturbances were generally similar between groups, although a slightly higher perception of halos was reported in the trifocal cohort.