A Prospective Comparative randomized post marketing clinical study to assess and compare the visual performance and safety of two different trifocal Intraocular lens following bilateral implantation

Presbyopia is one of the most common causes of vision impairment, affecting an estimated 2 billion people, globally.1 Presbyopia has been associated with negative impacts on quality of life in people aged 40 and above from developing and developed nations alike because it causes difficulties with reading and with accomplishing near vision tasks. Non-invasive methods of correcting presbyopia have been used for many years. While bifocal or multifocal progressive addition lenses, monofocal or bifocal contact lenses can provide satisfactory distance and near vision to presbyopes without the potential risks of a surgical procedure, they cannot restore or substitute the true process of accommodation of a younger individual. Among the surgical options, presbyopia correction can be achieved with excimer or femtosecond laser ablation on cornea (LASIK, PRK, Presbylasik, Supracor, Intracor, etc.), Another recent corneal approach is the insertion of inlays, both artificial and made of corneal tissue in order to change the central curvature of the cornea. Lens extraction with implantation of multifocal, monofocal (monovision) or accommodative intraocular lenses is another method for correction of presbyopia, and has started to become the preferred method for presbyopic correction, particularly in a cataract-aged population. Increasingly, trifocal IOLs – offering correction for near, intermediate and distance vision – are more frequently used.

Purpose:

To evaluate and compare the visual performance of two different trifocal intraocular lens in terms of quality of vision and verify the safety profile