Extended Depth of Focus Versus Monofocal IOLs in Patients With High Myopia: Objective and Subjective Visual Outcomes.

PURPOSE: To compare the objective and subjective outcomes between the extended depth of focus (EDOF) Mini Well intraocular lens (IOL) and the aspheric monofocal Mini-4-Ready IOL (both SIFI S.p.A.) in patients with high myopia. METHODS: In this prospective comparative study, 40 patients with high myopia (axial length ≥ 26 mm) were enrolled: 20 patients were bilaterally implanted with the EDOF Mini Well IOL (EDOF group) and 20 patients were bilaterally implanted with the Mini-4-Ready IOL (monofocal group). Three-month follow-up data included corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity at 4 m and 80, 67, and 40 cm, defocus curves, subjective and objective contrast sensitivity, objective optical quality (calculated with Optical Quality Analysis System; Visiometrics SL), halometry, and reading performance. Subjective visual quality was evaluated with National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument 42 scores. RESULTS: All visual acuities were significantly better in the EDOF group (P ⩽ .04) except monocular and binocular uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuities for distance (P ≥ .50). Defocus curves for myopic and hyperopic values were better in the EDOF group (P ⩽ .05), apart from +0.50 to -0.50 D (P ≥ .16). Contrast sensitivity curves was worse in the EDOF group in the mesopic-with-glare condition (P ⩽ .04). No differences were found in halometric values (P ≥ .15) and OQAS outcomes (P ≥ .47). National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument 42 subscale scores were better for expectation, near vision, activity limitations, and dependence on correction in the EDOF group (P ⩽ .04). CONCLUSIONS: Intermediate and near visual acuities were better in the EDOF group than in the monofocal group, with a comparable visual quality index between groups. [J Refract Surg. 2022;38(3):158-166.].

Extended Depth of Focus Versus Monofocal IOLs: Objective and Subjective Visual Outcomes.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the objective and subjective outcomes between bilateral implantation of the extended depth of focus (EDOF) Mini Well intraocular lens (IOL) and the aspheric monofocal Mini-4-Ready IOL (both SIFI S.p.A., Catania, Italy). METHODS: This prospective comparative study included 25 patients (50 eyes) bilaterally implanted with an EDOF Mini Well IOL (EDOF group) and 25 patients (50 eyes) bilaterally implanted with a Mini-4-Ready IOL (monofocal group). Three-month follow-up data included corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity at 4 m and 80, 67, and 40 cm. Defocus curves, subjective and objective contrast sensitivity, and objective optical quality (modulation transfer function cutoff and Strehl ratio calculated with Optical Quality Analysis System [OQAS]; Visiometrics SL, Terrassa, Spain), halometry, and reading performance were measured. Subjective visual quality was evaluated based on National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument 42 (NEI RQL-42) scores. RESULTS: Postoperative uncorrected and corrected monocular and binocular intermediate and near visual acuity was significantly better in the EDOF group (P < .001). No differences were observed for distance visual acuity (P ⩾ .312). Defocus curve outcomes for myopic values were better in the EDOF group (P < .001). No significant differences were found in hyperopic (obtained in steps of +0.50 diopters [D] from emmetropia to 1.50 D) values (P ⩾ .095), contrast sensitivity curves (P ⩾ .087), or OQAS outcomes (P ⩾ .138). Halometric values were significantly better in the monofocal group (P < .05). There was a correlation between mean keratometry values and intermediate/near visual acuity. Significantly better NEI RQL-42 subscale scores for near vision, far vision, activity limitations, glare, dependence on correction, and suboptimal correction were noted in the EDOF group (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Intermediate and near visual acuity was better after EDOF IOL than after aspheric monofocal IOL implantation while maintaining similar levels of visual quality, except for halo perception. [J Refract Surg. 2020;36(4):214-222.].