Comparison Between an Intraocular Lens With Extended Depth of Focus (Tecnis Symfony ZXR00) and a New Monofocal Intraocular Lens With Enhanced Intermediate Vision (Tecnis Eyhance ICB00)

52Citations
Citations of this article
52Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Purpose: This study compared the extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL) (ZXR00; Tecnis Symfony, Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, US) to a novel, higher-order aspheric monofocal IOL (ICB00; Tecnis Eyhance, Johnson & Johnson Vision, Santa Ana, CA, US) which uses the same platform and material. Methods: Medical records of patients undergoing cataract surgery with ZXR00 or ICB00 implantation between March 2020 and January 2021 and with the data available for the 3-month visit were reviewed. The uncorrected near, intermediate, and distance visual acuity (VA); corrected distance VA; and optical quality parameters were the main outcome measures. Results: Among the 174 enrolled patients, 72 and 102 received the ZXR00 and ICB00, respectively. The average patient ages were 59.6 ± 10.6 (range: 49 to 70) and 65.2 ± 8.2 (range: 45 to 82) years in the ZXR00 and ICB00 groups, respectively, with significantly older patients in the ICB00 group. The other baseline parameters were not different for the 2 groups. Compared to the ICB00 group, the ZXR00 group showed markedly superior near VA (P < 0.05) at 3 months postoperatively. In terms of optical quality, ICB00 was, statistically, significantly superior to ZXR00. Conclusions: The ZXR00 showed remarkable near vision and defocus curve smoothness, while the ICB00 achieved better optical quality. The 2 IOLs had comparable distance and intermediate vision.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jeon, Y. J., Yoon, Y., Kim, T. I., & Koh, K. (2021). Comparison Between an Intraocular Lens With Extended Depth of Focus (Tecnis Symfony ZXR00) and a New Monofocal Intraocular Lens With Enhanced Intermediate Vision (Tecnis Eyhance ICB00). Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology, 10(6), 542–547. https://doi.org/10.1097/APO.0000000000000439

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free