Published March 24, 2023
| Version v1
Publication
Positioning of enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses between conventional monofocal and extended depth of focus lenses: a scoping review
Description
Background New intraocular lenses (IOLs) have emerged since the originally coined monofocal and multifocal IOLs.
The extended depth of focus (EDoF) and enhanced monofocal IOLs (mono‑EDoF) that have appeared in the last
decade have caused some confusion in their classification. The aim of this review was to summarize the outcomes
provided by mono‑EDOF IOLs and to determine which of the endpoints, described by the American National Stand‑
ard (ANSI) for EDoF IOLs, are fulfilled.
Methods The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and WEB OF SCIENCE databases were searched. Two independent reviewers
screened the studies for inclusion and data extraction. The search strategy was limited to studies published between
2020 and 2022, but not by language. The results are presented as a narrative summary accompanied by tables, in
alignment with the objectives of this scoping review. Compliance with the endpoints for clinical outcomes described
in the American National Standard Z80.35–2018 (ANSI) for EDoF lenses was checked and additional endpoints were
defined.
Results Two systematic reviews, 13 laboratory, 21 clinical, and two mixed studies were included. Tecnis Eyhance was
the mono‑EDOF with the highest volume of evidence to date. Although laboratory studies included other IOLs, clini‑
cal evidence for them is still scarce, with only one study of IsoPure compared to a standard monofocal IOL. Evidence
in comparison to EDoF lenses is also scarce, even for Tecnis Eyhance, with only three studies including this lens in
comparison to an EDoF lens. After evaluation of the ANSI criteria, agreement was found in the failure for the increase
in depth of field equal to or greater than 0.5 D for a visual acuity (VA) level of 0.2 logMAR and none of the studies sup‑
ported that the median monocular VA at intermediate distance was at least 0.2 logMAR.
Conclusions Additional clinical evidence is required for other mono‑EDOF IOLs beyond Tecnis Eyhance. Until the
arrival of a standard classification, mono‑EDOF should be better still classified as monofocal because the ANSI stand‑
ards were not fully met.
Additional details
Identifiers
- URL
- https://idus.us.es/handle//11441/143562
- URN
- urn:oai:idus.us.es:11441/143562
Origin repository
- Origin repository
- USE