Extended Depth of Focus Versus Monofocal IOLs in Patients With High Myopia: Objective and Subjective Visual Outcomes

To compare the objective and subjective outcomes between the extended depth of focus (EDOF) Mini Well intraocular lens (IOL) and the aspheric monofocal Mini-4-Ready IOL (both SIFI S.p.A.) in patients with high myopia.

In this prospective comparative study, 40 patients with high myopia (axial length ≥ 26 mm) were enrolled: 20 patients were bilaterally implanted with the EDOF Mini Well IOL (EDOF group) and 20 patients were bilaterally implanted with the Mini-4-Ready IOL (monofocal group). Three-month follow-up data included corrected and uncorrected distance visual acuity at 4 m and 80, 67, and 40 cm, defocus curves, subjective and objective contrast sensitivity, objective optical quality (calculated with Optical Quality Analysis System; Visiometrics SL), halometry, and reading performance. Subjective visual quality was evaluated with National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument 42 scores.

All visual acuities were significantly better in the EDOF group (P ⩽ .04) except monocular and binocular uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuities for distance (P ≥ .50). Defocus curves for myopic and hyperopic values were better in the EDOF group (P ⩽ .05), apart from +0.50 to -0.50 D (P ≥ .16). Contrast sensitivity curves was worse in the EDOF group in the mesopic-with-glare condition (P ⩽ .04). No differences were found in halometric values (P ≥ .15) and OQAS outcomes (P ≥ .47). National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life Instrument 42 subscale scores were better for expectation, near vision, activity limitations, and dependence on correction in the EDOF group (P ⩽ .04).

Intermediate and near visual acuities were better in the EDOF group than in the monofocal group, with a comparable visual quality index between groups. [.