Evidence Hub

Expanding visual horizons: comparative outcomes of bilateral implantation of an extended depth-of-focus versus enhanced and standard monofocal intraocular lenses

Boz AAE, Atum M

BMC ophthalmology, 2026

197 participants

Abstract

Purpose: Patients undergoing cataract surgery have different postoperative visual priorities. Some primarily seek excellent uncorrected distance vision and accept the need for near spectacles, whereas others aim for greater spectacle independence across distance, intermediate, and near activities. This study compared visual and patient-reported outcomes after bilateral implantation of an extended depth-of-focus (EDOF) intraocular lens (IOL), an enhanced monofocal (EM) IOL and a standard monofocal IOL.

Methods: This retrospective consecutive comparative case series included patients who underwent bilateral phacoemulsification with implantation of the same IOL model in both eyes. The evaluated IOLs were Tecnis ZCB00 (standard monofocal), Tecnis Eyhance ICB00 (EM), and Asqelio ETLIO130C (EDOF). At 6 months postoperatively, monocular and binocular uncorrected visual acuity were assessed at distance (6 m), intermediate (66 cm), and near (40 cm). Additional outcome measures included manifest refraction, binocular defocus curves, patient-reported halo and glare symptoms, spectacle independence, and patient satisfaction.

Results: A total of 197 patients were included (78 monofocal, 65 EM, and 54 EDOF). Baseline demographic and preoperative ocular characteristics were comparable across groups. Postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity was similar among groups. Intermediate visual acuity was better in the EM and EDOF groups than in the monofocal group, with the best…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 197 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free