Comparison of the Clinical Performance of Refractive Rotationally Asymmetric Multifocal IOLs with Other Types of IOLs: A Meta-Analysis

Table 3

Comparison of defocus curves between the Mplus group and the control group.

Study	Mplus group	Control group	Mplus IOLs provided better performance	Control group provided better performance
Munoz et al. [6]	Mplus LS-312 MF30	High-add bifocal IOL: Acri.Lisa 366	In 3, 2.5, 2, 1.5, 1, 0.5, 0, −0.5, −1, −1.5, −2, −2.5 D	In −3, −3.5, −4, −4.5, −5 D
Alio et al. [7]	Mplus LS-312 MF30	High-add bifocal IOL: Acri.Lisa 366	In 1.5, 1, −1, −1.5, −2, −3, −3.5, −4, −4.5 D	In 0.5, 0, −0.5, −2.5 D
Alio et al. [8]	Mplus LS-312 MF30	High-add bifocal IOL: ReSTOR SN6AD3	In 1.5, −1, −1.5, −2, −2.5, −3, −3.5 D	In 0.5, 1, −0.5, −4, −4.5 D
Alfonso et al. [13]	Mplus LS-312 MF30	Low-add bifocal IOL: ReSTOR SN6AD1	In 2, 1.5, 1, −1, −1.5, D	In 0.5, 0, −0.5, −2, −2.5, 3, −3.5, −4 D
van der Linden et al. [14]	Mplus LS-312 MF30	Low-add bifocal IOL: ReSTOR SN6AD1	In 0, −1.5 D	In −2, −2.5, −3 D
Alio et al. [3, 12]	Mplus LS-312 MF30	Spherical monofocal IOL: Acri.Smart 48S	In 2.5, 2, 1.5, 1, 0.5, 0, −0.5, −1, −1.5, −3.5 D	In −2, −2.5, −3, −4, −4.5 D
Alio et al. [11]	Mplus LS-312 MF15	Accommodating IOL: Crystalens HD	In 1.5, 1, 0.5, 0, −0.5, −1, −1.5, −2, −2.5, −3 D	—

Significantly different.