Multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses for age-related cataract patients: a system review and meta-analysis...

We compare multifocal intraocular lenses (MFIOLs) to monofocal IOLs for visual acuity (VA), contrast sensitivity, and adverse events using data from 21 randomized controlled trials with 2951 subjects. There was no statistical difference between uncorrected distance VA and corrected distance VA. Compared with monofocal IOLs, MFIOLs showed a better performance on uncorrected intermediate VA measured at 60 cm and uncorrected near VA; the mean differences were -0.06 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.10, -0.03) and -0.13 (95% CI: -0.20, -0.07). Distance-corrected intermediate VA and distance-corrected near VA were measured wearing distance correction. MFIOLs performed better than monofocal IOLs on distance-corrected intermediate VA at 60 cm and distance-corrected near VA; the mean differences were -0.09 (95% CI: -0.12, -0.06) and -0.31 (95% CI: -0.43, -0.19). The contrast sensitivity of the MFIOL group was lower than that of the monofocal IOL group; mean difference was -0.06 (95% CI: -0.11, -0.02). More patients were spectacle free in the MFIOL group; the risk ratio was 2.86 (95% CI: 1.73, 4.73). More patients were troubled by glare and halos in the MFIOL group; the risk ratios were 1.91 (95% CI: 1.24, 2.95) and 3.08 (95% CI: 2.11, 4.49). We conclude that, compared with monofocal IOLs, MFIOLs give patients better near vision and intermediate vision at 60 cm, both corrected and uncorrected. Patients undergoing MFIOLs implantation are more likely to be spectacle free but have a higher risk of glare, halos, and lower contrast sensitivity.