Retrospective Study Of Comparative Clinical Outcomes After Cataract Surgery With Tecnis Puresee™ And Tecnis Eyhance™ Intraocular Lenses
Published 2026 - 44th Congress of the ESCRS
Reference: POCAT559 | Type: Free paper | DOI: 10.82333/z913-dy98
Authors: Dr Nabila Jones* 1 , Dr Alise Kalteniece 1 , Mr Amir Hamid 2 , Prof. Clare ODonnell 3
1Optegra Eye Sciences,Optegra Eye Health Care,Manchester,United Kingdom, 2Optegra Eye Sciences,Optegra Eye Health Care,Manchester,United Kingdom;Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health,University of Manchester,Manchester,United Kingdom, 3Optegra Eye Sciences,Optegra Eye Health Care,Manchester,United Kingdom;Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health,University of Manchester,Manchester,United Kingdom;College of Health and Life Sciences,Aston University,Birmingham,United Kingdom
Purpose
To compare visual and refractive outcomes of two intraocular lens models (IOLs): TECNIS PureSee/PureSee toric (a newer partial depth of field extended (Partial DOFi-Ex)) IOL with the more established Eyhance/Eyhance toric IOL (partial depth of field enhanced (Partial DOFi-En)) IOL implanted bilaterally following cataract surgery.
Setting
Optegra Eye Health Care, UK
Methods
A retrospective analysis was conducted on 176 cataract procedures (88 eyes Eyhance/Eyhance toric IOL, 88 eyes PureSee/Puresee toric IOL), targeting emmetropia in all cases. Data were collated from the electronic medical records for analysis. Postoperative monocular and binocular uncorrected distance (UDVA), and near (UNVA) visual acuities, and refractive accuracy were evaluated. Eyes with reason for guarded visual prognosis and/or less than a week’s follow-up were excluded from analysis.
Results
There were no differences between groups for age and no reported operative complications. Postoperative monocular UDVA was better in the PureSee group (0.03 ±0.09 logMAR vs. 0.08 ±0.13 logMAR (p<0.05). Mean binocular distance vision for the PureSee group (N=44) was -0.03 ±0.06 and for the Eyhance cohort (N=44) it was 0.01 ±0.09 logMAR (p<0.001). Mean monocular near vision (UNVA) for the PureSee group (N=44) was 0.37 ±0.12 and for the Eyhance cohort (N=44) it was 0.46±0.20 logMAR (p<0.001). Binocular near visual acuity was 0.30 ±0.13 for the PureSee group and 0.37 ±0.18 for the Eyhance group. Refractive accuracy (within ±0.50 D of predicted postoperative refraction) was comparable between groups (76% PureSee vs. 77% Eyhance; p>0.05).
Conclusions
Both PureSee and Eyhance demonstrated good visual outcomes and refractive accuracy, with PureSee comparing favourably to Eyhance for the key metrics assessed.