***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: PURPOSE : To evaluate the functional outcome after implantation of the Tecnis ZM900 multifocal intraocular lens ( IOL ) ( AMO ) and the Array SA40 multifocal IOL ( AMO ) . SETTING : Department of Ophthalmology , Bundesknappschaft´s Hospital , Sulzbach , and the Department of Ophthalmology , Marienhospital , Aachen , Germany . METHODS : In a prospect i ve comparative 2‐center trial , Tecnis ZM900 and the Array SA40 multifocal IOLs were bilaterally implanted in 50 patients ( 50 eyes Tecnis , 50 eyes Array ) by 1 surgeon at each center . The following parameters were assessed 30 to 60 days and 120 to 180 days after surgery in both eyes : refraction , pupil size , uncorrected and best corrected visual acuities for distance and near at different contrast levels , and photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity at different spatial frequencies . Patient satisfaction ( spectacle independence , photic phenomena , overall satisfaction ) was assessed by a question naire . RESULTS : The main differences between the 2 multifocal IOLs were the better uncorrected near visual acuity ( P<.001 ) , distance‐corrected near visual acuity ( P<.001 ) , the mesopic contrast sensitivity at high spatial frequencies ( P<.05 ) as well as greater independence from spectacles in patients with the Tecnis multifocal IOL , result ing in higher levels of patient satisfaction . CONCLUSION : The aspherical diffractive Tecnis multifocal IOL gave better outcomes than the Array multifocal IOL OBJECTIVE Two million cataract extraction s are performed annually in the United States . The procedure is nearly always accompanied by implantation of a monofocal intraocular lens ( IOL ) , which corrects the patient 's distance vision . The authors ' objective was to measure visual function and quality -of-life outcomes associated with bilateral implantation of a multifocal IOL , which corrects distance and near vision , and to compare the outcomes with those of the st and ard therapy . DESIGN A prospect i ve , r and omized , double-masked , clinical trial was conducted at eight sites in the United States , seven sites in Germany , and one site in Austria . PARTICIPANTS Participants included 245 cataract patients , 127 of whom received the multifocal IOL bilaterally and 118 of whom received a monofocal IOL of nearly identical construction bilaterally . METHODS Clinical data included visual acuity ( VA ) , complications , and adverse events . Quality -of-life data were collected using a previously vali date d survey instrument at baseline , after first eye surgery , and after second eye surgery . RESULTS At 3 months after surgery , patients who had received multifocal IOLs had significantly better uncorrected and distance corrected binocular near VA compared with patients who had received monofocal IOLs ( mean uncorrected VA , 20/26 multifocal vs. 20/40 monofocal ; mean distance corrected VA , 20/28 multifocal vs. 20/45 monofocal ; P < 0.0001 ) . Additionally , 96 % of patients who had received multifocal IOLs and 65 % of patients who had received monofocal IOLs achieved both 20/40 and J3 ( Jaeger ) or better uncorrected , binocular distance and near visual acuities ( P < 0 . 0001 ) . Patients who had received multifocal IOLs were more likely than patients who had received monofocal IOLs to never wear glasses overall ( 32 % multifocal vs. 8 % monofocal ; P < 0.0001 ) . On a 4-point scale , patients who had received multifocal IOLs on average reported having between " a little bit " and " some " glare or halo , whereas patients who had received monofocal IOLs reported between " none " and " a little bit " of glare or halo ( 1.57 vs. 0.43 ; P < 0.001 ) . Patients who had received multifocal IOLs rated their vision without glasses better overall at near and at intermediate distances ( P < or = 0.002 ) and demonstrated better visual function for near tasks and social activities . CONCLUSIONS Cataract patients who received multifocal IOLs at time of surgery obtained better uncorrected and distance corrected near VA and reported better overall vision , less limitation in visual function , less spectacle dependency , and more glare or halo than those who received traditional monofocal IOLs Aims To evaluate the functional effect of bilateral implantation of two different multifocal intraocular lenses ( IOL ) compared with the st and ard monofocal IOL . Methods Sixty-nine patients were recruited into a prospect i ve , double-masked , r and omised , controlled trial at a single hospital in the United Kingdom . Sixty completed follow-up ; 16 implanted with  monofocal IOLs  , 29 with AMO ’ ARRAY ’ multifocal IOLs and 15 with Storz ’ TRUEVISTA ’ bifocal IOLs . Phacoemulsification and IOL implantation was performed to a st and ardised technique in both eyes within a 2-month period . The main outcome measures were distance and near visual acuity , depth of field and vali date d assessment of subjective function ( TyPE question naire ) . Results Unaided distance acuity was good , and equivalent across the three groups . Corrected distance acuity was significantly lower in the bifocal group . Patients with multifocal and bifocal IOLs could read smaller absolute print size than those in the monofocal group ( P = 0.05 ) , but at a closer reading distance such that mean unaided near acuity was equal in the three groups . Corrected near acuity was significantly higher in the monofocal control group ( P < 0.05 ) . Depth of field was increased in multifocal ( P = 0.06 ) and bifocal ( P = 0.004 ) groups . Overall visual satisfaction was equal in the three groups , while near visual satisfaction was higher in the multifocal group than the monofocal ( P = 0.04 ) . Spectacle independence was not seen in the monofocal group , but was achieved in 28 % of multifocal IOL patients and 33 % of bifocal patients ( P < 0.001 ) . Adverse symptoms such as glare and haloes were significantly more bothersome with multifocal ( not bifocal ) IOLs than monofocals ( P = 0.01 ) . Conclusions Multifocal and bifocal IOLs  improved unaided near vision performance , with around one in three patients becoming spectacle-independent . The main adverse effect was an increased incidence of subjective glare and haloes in the multifocal IOL group Purpose : To compare contrast sensitivity ( CS ) after implantation of a diffractive bifocal intraocular lens ( IOL ) and a monofocal IOL of similar design . Setting : Seven European centers . Methods : In this r and omized , prospect i ve study , CS was tested 5 months after  cataract and IOL implantation surgery  in 115 patients with a diffractive bifocal IOL and 106 patients with a monofocal IOL .  It was also tested in a subgroup of 38 patients who had bilateral implantation of a diffractive bifocal IOL .  Contrast sensitivity was tested using the Vision Contrast Test System ( VCTS ) . Results : In patients with a best corrected visual acuity ( BCVA ) of 1.0 or better , the CS at all spatial frequencies ( 1.5 to 18 cycles/degree ) , both at distance and near , was slightly lower in the bifocal IOL group than in the monofocal group . Mean values were within the normal range . In patients with a BCVA of less than 1.0 , the CS was lower and the difference between the bifocal and monofocal groups was less . In patients with bilateral bifocal IOLs  , CS was better when tested bilaterally than when testing the better eye alone . Pupil size affected the results to a small degree . Contrast sensitivity appeared to improve over time after implantation of a diffractive bifocal IOL . Conclusions : In patients with cataract and no other eye pathology , the diffractive bifocal IOL will slightly reduce the CS at all spatial frequencies . In those with reduced visual acuity after cataract surgery , CS will be reduced accordingly . In this situation , the reduction from the diffractive bifocal optic would be minor Purpose : To evaluate the efficacy of diffractive multifocal and pseudo-accommodative IOLs in pre-presbyopes with cataract . Material s and Methods : A prospect i ve r and omized control study was performed on patients with cataract in the pre-presbyopic age group . Patients were r and omly allocated to 2 groups : Group 1 comprised 12 patients who underwent implantation of a diffractive multifocal IOL  and Group 2 comprised 13 patients who underwent implantation of a pseudo-accommodative IOL after st and ard phacoemulsification .  Efficacy was measured by postoperative distance and near uncorrected visual acuity , contrast sensitivity , spectacle independence , and glare and halo . Results : The study patients were aged 22–35 years and included 14 females and 11 males . All examinations were performed 6 months postoperatively by a second observer unaware of the study objectives . Mean uncorrected distance visual acuity was 0.125 ± 0.1 LogMAR in Group 1 and 0.1385 ± 0.1 in Group 2 ( P = 0.7993 ) . Near visual acuity was 0.0917 ± 0.1 in Group 1 and 0.386 ± 0.2 in Group 2 ( P < 0.0001 ) . Contrast sensitivity was good in both groups based on the Pelli-Robson chart ( P = 0.3919 ) . Night-time glare was present in 3 ( 25 % ) patients in Group 1 and in 2 ( 15.4 % ) patients in Group 2 . No patients in either group had difficulty driving during the day or night . Ten patients in Group 1 ( 83.3 % ) and 7 patients in Group 2 ( 53.85 % ) had spectacle independence ( P = 0.1249 ) . Conclusion : Greater proportions of patients who underwent diffractive multifocal implantation  achieved functional distance and near vision as compared to those in the pseudo-accommodative IOL group . There was greater variability in near vision in patients who received the pseudo-accommodative IOL as compared to those in the multifocal IOLs . Contrast sensitivity remained adequate in both the groups . There were more glare and halos in the multifocal group as compared to those in the pseudo-accommodative group . More patients achieved spectacle independence  with multifocal IOLs PURPOSE To compare contrast sensitivity , visual acuity ( VA ) , and halos in subjects bilaterally implanted with 1 of 3 FDA -approved presbyopia-correcting intraocular lenses .  DESIGN Prospect i ve , r and omized , partially masked , multicenter clinical trial . METHODS Seventy-eight subjects were r and omized sequentially for bilateral implantation with the Crystalens AO ( Bausch & Lomb Surgical ) , AcrySof IQ ReSTOR + 3.0 ( Alcon Laboratories ) , or Tecnis Multifocal ( Abbott Medical Optics ) lenses . Subjects were evaluated through visit 4 ( 4 to 6 months after surgery ) with the following monocular and binocular assessment s : high- and low-contrast VA , contrast sensitivity without glare , halos or starbursts , defocus curves , optical scatter , retinal point spread function , and safety . RESULTS The Crystalens AO and ReSTOR + 3.0 demonstrated better monocular and binocular contrast sensitivity without glare at low to mid spatial frequencies compared with the Tecnis Multifocal lens . Binocular uncorrected distance VA was not significantly different between the 3 lenses . The Crystalens AO had significantly better binocular low-contrast distance-corrected VA than the ReSTOR + 3.0 and better mean monocular low-contrast DCVA than the Tecnis Multifocal lens . The Crystalens AO demonstrated significantly better monocular and binocular uncorrected and distance-corrected intermediate VA than the ReSTOR + 3.0 or Tecnis Multifocal lenses . The ReSTOR+3.0 lens had significantly better monocular and binocular uncorrected and distance-corrected near VA tested at 40 cm compared with the Crystalens AO and Tecnis Multifocal lens . The Crystalens AO elicited significantly less halos than the Tecnis Multifocal lens and less optical scatter than the ReSTOR + 3.0 or Tecnis Multifocal lens . CONCLUSIONS The Crystalens AO had statistically better uncorrected intermediate VA and distance-corrected intermediate VA than the ReSTOR + 3.0 or Tecnis Multifocal lenses and fewer photic phenomenon than the Tecnis Multifocal lens . Both multifocals had better distance-corrected near VA and uncorrected near VA than the Crystalens AO . These findings may guide intraocular lens selection for individual patients seeking to optimize vision at specific vergences or lighting conditions Background / aims To assess over a 36-month period functional results of the modified INTRACOR femtosecond laser-based intrastromal procedure to treat presbyopia . Methods 20 eyes of 20 presbyopic patients with mild hyperopia were included . The INTRACOR procedure with a modified pattern ( six concentric intrastromal ring cuts ) was performed using the FEMTEC femtosecond laser ( Bausch+Lomb/Technolas Perfect Vision , Munich , Germany ) . Patients were also r 
    Output:
    
Indirect data suggest also that it is inferior ( ReZoom refractive , TwinSet diffractive ) or tends to be inferior ( Array refractive ) to other MFIOLs .
LASIK was comparable to Tecnis in refractive surgery .
Indirect data suggest also that it tends to superiority vs. ReZoom or Array refractive MFIOLs .
One quality direct RCT indicated less glare/dazzle with pseudophakic monovision vs. Tecnis in cataract patients .
Dysphotopsia is less common with monovision , but estimate uncertainty is high ( bias , imprecision )