Skip to content

Clinical Investigation of the Visual Outcomes and Safety of a Trifocal Toric IOL in an Asian Population

Clinical Investigation of the Visual Outcomes and Safety of AcrySof® IQ PanOptix® Toric Trifocal IOLs in an Asian Population

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04528069
Enrollment
58
Registered
2020-08-27
Start date
2020-11-16
Completion date
2021-12-17
Last updated
2022-12-30

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Aphakia, Corneal Astigmatism

Keywords

Intraocular lens, Cataract

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical performance of the ACRYSOF® IQ PanOptix® Toric Trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) when implanted in the eye following cataract removal in an Asian population.

Detailed description

Both eyes will be implanted with the PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL. The eye with the highest astigmatism will be implanted first. The second eye will be implanted within 7-14 days of the first eye. Subjects will attend a total of 10 scheduled visits as follows: 1 screening visit, 1 operative visit for each eye, 2 post-operative visits for each eye, and 3 postoperative visits where both eyes will be evaluated. The duration of participation for each subject will be approximately 8 months. This study will be conducted in Australia.

Interventions

DEVICEACRYSOF® IQ PanOptix® Toric Trifocal IOL

Single-piece, ultraviolet and blue-light filtering, foldable, multifocal toric IOL intended to provide vision to aphakic subjects at near, intermediate, and distance and to correct pre-existing corneal astigmatism. This device is approved in Australia.

PROCEDURECataract surgery

Cataract extraction by phacoemulsification, followed by implantation of the IOL per investigator's standard of care and instructions for use

Sponsors

Alcon Research
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Key Inclusion Criteria: * Planned bilateral cataract removal followed by posterior chamber IOL implantation with PanOptix Toric (TFNT30, TFNT40, TFNT50, or TFNT60); * Calculated target residual refractive error within ±0.50 diopter (D) of emmetropia within the commercially available IOL Power Range in both operative eyes; * Preoperative regular corneal keratometric astigmatism with predicted residual refractive astigmatism ≤ 0.50 diopter (D) in both operative eyes; * Other protocol-defined inclusion criteria may apply. Key

Exclusion criteria

* Preoperative irregular astigmatism; * Clinically significant corneal abnormalities; * Glaucoma; * History of or current retinal disease; anterior or posterior segment inflammation; * Other planned ocular surgical procedures including, but not limited to, limbal relaxing incision (LRI)/Astigmatic Keratotomy and laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK); * Other protocol-defined

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Mean Monocular Residual Manifest Cylinder for All Operative Eyes for All IOL Models CombinedMonth 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperativeManifest cylinder is the amount of added correction needed to compensate for any astigmatism that may be present. A manifest refraction (manual vision test) was conducted using letter charts and a phoropter. Residual manifest cylinder was measured in diopters and reported in plus cylinder form, with a smaller number indicating a lesser amount of added correction. Eyes were assessed individually and combined for the analysis. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.
Percentage of Eyes With IOL Rotation Less Than 10 DegreesMonth 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperativeIOL rotation was defined as the difference in IOL axis of orientation from Day 1 postoperative. IOL rotation was assessed by the investigator using a slit lamp and was recorded in degrees, with a smaller number indicating less rotation. Eyes were assessed individually and combined for the analysis. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.
Mean Binocular Best Corrected Distance Visual Acuity (BCDVA)Month 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperativeVisual acuity (VA) was assessed at a distance of 4 meters with refractive correction in place using a visual acuity chart. VA was measured in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), with 0.0 logMAR corresponding to 20/20 Snellen visual acuity, or normal distance eyesight. Eyes were assessed binocularly (eyes together). A lower value denotes better visual acuity. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.
Mean Binocular Distance Corrected Intermediate Visual Acuity (DCIVA)Month 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperativeVisual acuity (VA) was assessed at a distance of 60 meters with distance correction (plus or minus power) in place. VA was measured in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), with 0.0 logMAR corresponding to 20/20 Snellen visual acuity, or normal distance eyesight. Eyes were assessed binocularly (eyes together). A lower value denotes better visual acuity. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.
Mean Binocular Distance Corrected Near Visual Acuity (DCNVA)Month 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperativeVisual acuity (VA) was assessed at a distance of 40 centimeters with distance correction (plus or minus power) in place using a visual acuity chart. VA was measured in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), with 0.0 logMAR corresponding to 20/20 Snellen visual acuity, or normal distance eyesight. Eyes were assessed binocularly (eyes together). A lower value denotes better visual acuity. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.
Percentage of Eyes With Secondary Surgical Interventions (SSIs), by CategoryUp to Month 6 postoperativeA secondary surgical intervention (SSI) was defined as a surgical procedure occurring after primary implantation of the IOL. SSIs are reported categorically as SSIs related to the IOL and due to optical properties, SSIs related to the IOL and not due to optical properties, and SSIs unrelated to the IOL.
Percentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbancePreoperative, Month 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperativeThe Questionnaire for Visual Disturbances (QUVID) is a patient-reported outcomes questionnaire that collects responses from the subject about 7 vision-related experiences. For each experience, the subject was asked if he/she had experienced it during the past 7 days. Subjects responding Yes were then asked to rate how severe their worst experience was during the past 7 days. Subjects responded on a 5-point scale: 0=None; 1=A little; 2=Mild; 3=Moderate; 4=Severe. Subjects responding No were automatically imputed as reporting, 0=None. Percentage was calculated as number of subjects with response in specified category divided by number of subjects with data regardless of response, times 100. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.
Percentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Preoperative, Month 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperativeQUVID is a patient-reported outcomes questionnaire that collects responses from the subject about 7 vision-related experiences. For each experience, the subject was asked if he/she had experienced it during the past 7 days. Subjects responding Yes were then asked to rate how severe their worst experience was with the vision-related experience in the past 7 days. Subjects responded on a 5-point scale: 0=Not bothered at all; 1=Bothered a little bit; 2=Bothered somewhat; 3=Bothered quite a bit; 4=Bothered very much. Subjects responding No were automatically imputed as reporting, 0=Not bothered at all. Percentage was calculated as number of subjects with response in specified category divided by number of subjects with data regardless of response, times 100. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.
Percentage of Subjects With Ocular Serious Adverse Events Including Serious Adverse Device EffectsUp to Month 6 postoperativeAn adverse event (AE) was defined as untoward medical occurrence, unintended disease or injury, or untoward clinical sign (including abnormal laboratory findings) in subjects, users, or other persons, whether or not related to the investigational medical device (test product). AEs were obtained through solicited and spontaneous comments from subjects and through observations by the Investigator. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.
Percentage of Subjects With Nonocular Serious Adverse Events Including Serious Adverse Device EffectsUp to Month 6 postoperativeAn adverse event (AE) was defined as untoward medical occurrence, unintended disease or injury, or untoward clinical sign (including abnormal laboratory findings) in subjects, users, or other persons, whether or not related to the investigational medical device (test product). AEs were obtained through solicited and spontaneous comments from subjects and through observations by the Investigator. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.

Countries

Australia

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Subjects were recruited from 4 investigative sites located in Australia.

Pre-assignment details

A total of 58 subjects were enrolled in the study (i.e., signed informed consent), of whom 4 were screen failures. This reporting group includes all subjects (54) implanted with the IOL in one or both eyes.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL
PanOptix Toric Trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implanted in the capsular bag in the posterior chamber following cataract surgery and intended for long-term use over the lifetime of the cataract patient. Both eyes were implanted (bilateral implantation).
54
Total54

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000
Overall StudyAdverse Event1
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up1
Overall StudyPatient Unable to Attend1
Overall StudyPatient Unable to Come1

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicPanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL
Age, Continuous66.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.99
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
54 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black or African American
0 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Other
0 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
0 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Australia
54 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
36 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
18 Participants
Specific Asian Nationality
Chinese
54 Participants
Specific Asian Nationality
Japanese
0 Participants
Specific Asian Nationality
Korean
0 Participants
Specific Asian Nationality
Mongolian
0 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
EG003
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 540 / 540 / 510 / 54
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 545 / 544 / 510 / 54
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 541 / 541 / 511 / 54

Outcome results

Primary

Mean Binocular Best Corrected Distance Visual Acuity (BCDVA)

Visual acuity (VA) was assessed at a distance of 4 meters with refractive correction in place using a visual acuity chart. VA was measured in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), with 0.0 logMAR corresponding to 20/20 Snellen visual acuity, or normal distance eyesight. Eyes were assessed binocularly (eyes together). A lower value denotes better visual acuity. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Month 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperative

Population: AAS

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All EyesMean Binocular Best Corrected Distance Visual Acuity (BCDVA)Month 3 postoperative0.043 logMARStandard Deviation 0.0881
All EyesMean Binocular Best Corrected Distance Visual Acuity (BCDVA)Month 6 postoperative0.022 logMARStandard Deviation 0.081
Primary

Mean Binocular Distance Corrected Intermediate Visual Acuity (DCIVA)

Visual acuity (VA) was assessed at a distance of 60 meters with distance correction (plus or minus power) in place. VA was measured in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), with 0.0 logMAR corresponding to 20/20 Snellen visual acuity, or normal distance eyesight. Eyes were assessed binocularly (eyes together). A lower value denotes better visual acuity. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Month 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperative

Population: AAS

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All EyesMean Binocular Distance Corrected Intermediate Visual Acuity (DCIVA)Month 3 postoperative0.075 logMARStandard Deviation 0.1068
All EyesMean Binocular Distance Corrected Intermediate Visual Acuity (DCIVA)Month 6 postoperative0.089 logMARStandard Deviation 0.1074
Primary

Mean Binocular Distance Corrected Near Visual Acuity (DCNVA)

Visual acuity (VA) was assessed at a distance of 40 centimeters with distance correction (plus or minus power) in place using a visual acuity chart. VA was measured in logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR), with 0.0 logMAR corresponding to 20/20 Snellen visual acuity, or normal distance eyesight. Eyes were assessed binocularly (eyes together). A lower value denotes better visual acuity. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Month 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperative

Population: AAS

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All EyesMean Binocular Distance Corrected Near Visual Acuity (DCNVA)Month 3 postoperative0.161 logMARStandard Deviation 0.0924
All EyesMean Binocular Distance Corrected Near Visual Acuity (DCNVA)Month 6 postoperative0.139 logMARStandard Deviation 0.0886
Primary

Mean Monocular Residual Manifest Cylinder for All Operative Eyes for All IOL Models Combined

Manifest cylinder is the amount of added correction needed to compensate for any astigmatism that may be present. A manifest refraction (manual vision test) was conducted using letter charts and a phoropter. Residual manifest cylinder was measured in diopters and reported in plus cylinder form, with a smaller number indicating a lesser amount of added correction. Eyes were assessed individually and combined for the analysis. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Month 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperative

Population: All-Implanted Analysis Set (AAS): All eyes with successful IOL implantation with at least one post-operative visit and data at study visit

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
All EyesMean Monocular Residual Manifest Cylinder for All Operative Eyes for All IOL Models CombinedMonth 3 postoperative0.219 diopterStandard Deviation 0.2388
All EyesMean Monocular Residual Manifest Cylinder for All Operative Eyes for All IOL Models CombinedMonth 6 postoperative0.198 diopterStandard Deviation 0.2392
Primary

Percentage of Eyes With IOL Rotation Less Than 10 Degrees

IOL rotation was defined as the difference in IOL axis of orientation from Day 1 postoperative. IOL rotation was assessed by the investigator using a slit lamp and was recorded in degrees, with a smaller number indicating less rotation. Eyes were assessed individually and combined for the analysis. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Month 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperative

Population: AAS

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
All EyesPercentage of Eyes With IOL Rotation Less Than 10 DegreesMonth 3 postoperative100 percentage of eyes
All EyesPercentage of Eyes With IOL Rotation Less Than 10 DegreesMonth 6 postoperative100 percentage of eyes
Primary

Percentage of Eyes With Secondary Surgical Interventions (SSIs), by Category

A secondary surgical intervention (SSI) was defined as a surgical procedure occurring after primary implantation of the IOL. SSIs are reported categorically as SSIs related to the IOL and due to optical properties, SSIs related to the IOL and not due to optical properties, and SSIs unrelated to the IOL.

Time frame: Up to Month 6 postoperative

Population: Safety Analysis Set (SAS): All eyes with attempted IOL implantation, successful or aborted after contact with the eye, and data at study visit

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
All EyesPercentage of Eyes With Secondary Surgical Interventions (SSIs), by CategorySSIs Related to the IOL - Not Due to Optical Properties0.0 percentage of eyes
All EyesPercentage of Eyes With Secondary Surgical Interventions (SSIs), by CategorySSIs Related to IOL - Due to Optical Properties0.0 percentage of eyes
All EyesPercentage of Eyes With Secondary Surgical Interventions (SSIs), by CategorySSIs Unrelated to the IOL1.9 percentage of eyes
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Eyes With Secondary Surgical Interventions (SSIs), by CategorySSIs Related to the IOL - Not Due to Optical Properties0.0 percentage of eyes
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Eyes With Secondary Surgical Interventions (SSIs), by CategorySSIs Related to IOL - Due to Optical Properties0.0 percentage of eyes
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Eyes With Secondary Surgical Interventions (SSIs), by CategorySSIs Unrelated to the IOL2.0 percentage of eyes
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Eyes With Secondary Surgical Interventions (SSIs), by CategorySSIs Related to IOL - Due to Optical Properties0.0 percentage of eyes
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Eyes With Secondary Surgical Interventions (SSIs), by CategorySSIs Unrelated to the IOL1.9 percentage of eyes
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Eyes With Secondary Surgical Interventions (SSIs), by CategorySSIs Related to the IOL - Not Due to Optical Properties0.0 percentage of eyes
Primary

Percentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)

QUVID is a patient-reported outcomes questionnaire that collects responses from the subject about 7 vision-related experiences. For each experience, the subject was asked if he/she had experienced it during the past 7 days. Subjects responding Yes were then asked to rate how severe their worst experience was with the vision-related experience in the past 7 days. Subjects responded on a 5-point scale: 0=Not bothered at all; 1=Bothered a little bit; 2=Bothered somewhat; 3=Bothered quite a bit; 4=Bothered very much. Subjects responding No were automatically imputed as reporting, 0=Not bothered at all. Percentage was calculated as number of subjects with response in specified category divided by number of subjects with data regardless of response, times 100. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Preoperative, Month 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperative

Population: SAS

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Halos - Bothered very much7.8 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Blurred Vision - Bothered very much20.0 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Hazy Vision - Bothered very much13.7 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Starbursts - Bothered very much9.8 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Dark Area - Bothered very much3.9 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Double Vision - Bothered very much5.9 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Glare - Bothered very much21.6 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Hazy Vision - Bothered very much0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Starbursts - Bothered very much4.2 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Halos - Bothered very much0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Glare - Bothered very much6.3 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Blurred Vision - Bothered very much2.1 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Double Vision - Bothered very much0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Dark Area - Bothered very much0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Blurred Vision - Bothered very much2.1 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Halos - Bothered very much2.1 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Dark Area - Bothered very much0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Double Vision - Bothered very much0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Hazy Vision - Bothered very much0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Glare - Bothered very much0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Most Bothersome Visual Disturbance (QUVID)Starbursts - Bothered very much2.1 percentage of participants
Primary

Percentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual Disturbance

The Questionnaire for Visual Disturbances (QUVID) is a patient-reported outcomes questionnaire that collects responses from the subject about 7 vision-related experiences. For each experience, the subject was asked if he/she had experienced it during the past 7 days. Subjects responding Yes were then asked to rate how severe their worst experience was during the past 7 days. Subjects responded on a 5-point scale: 0=None; 1=A little; 2=Mild; 3=Moderate; 4=Severe. Subjects responding No were automatically imputed as reporting, 0=None. Percentage was calculated as number of subjects with response in specified category divided by number of subjects with data regardless of response, times 100. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Preoperative, Month 3 postoperative, Month 6 postoperative

Population: SAS

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceHalos - Severe9.8 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceBlurred Vision - Severe18.0 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceHazy Vision - Severe9.8 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceStarbursts - Severe11.8 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceDark Area - Severe2.0 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceDouble Vision - Severe2.0 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceGlare - Severe19.6 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceHazy Vision - Severe0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceStarbursts - Severe17.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceHalos - Severe6.3 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceGlare - Severe8.3 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceBlurred Vision - Severe0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceDouble Vision - Severe0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceDark Area - Severe0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceBlurred Vision - Severe0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceHalos - Severe0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceDark Area - Severe0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceDouble Vision - Severe0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceHazy Vision - Severe0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceGlare - Severe6.5 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - All EyesPercentage of Subjects With a Severe Visual DisturbanceStarbursts - Severe14.9 percentage of participants
Primary

Percentage of Subjects With Nonocular Serious Adverse Events Including Serious Adverse Device Effects

An adverse event (AE) was defined as untoward medical occurrence, unintended disease or injury, or untoward clinical sign (including abnormal laboratory findings) in subjects, users, or other persons, whether or not related to the investigational medical device (test product). AEs were obtained through solicited and spontaneous comments from subjects and through observations by the Investigator. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Up to Month 6 postoperative

Population: SAS

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With Nonocular Serious Adverse Events Including Serious Adverse Device EffectsCoronary arterial stent insertion1.9 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With Nonocular Serious Adverse Events Including Serious Adverse Device EffectsCoronary artery disease1.9 percentage of participants
Primary

Percentage of Subjects With Ocular Serious Adverse Events Including Serious Adverse Device Effects

An adverse event (AE) was defined as untoward medical occurrence, unintended disease or injury, or untoward clinical sign (including abnormal laboratory findings) in subjects, users, or other persons, whether or not related to the investigational medical device (test product). AEs were obtained through solicited and spontaneous comments from subjects and through observations by the Investigator. No formal statistical hypothesis testing was prespecified for this outcome measure.

Time frame: Up to Month 6 postoperative

Population: SAS

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With Ocular Serious Adverse Events Including Serious Adverse Device EffectsDiabetic retinal oedema1.9 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With Ocular Serious Adverse Events Including Serious Adverse Device EffectsIntra-ocular injection1.9 percentage of participants
All EyesPercentage of Subjects With Ocular Serious Adverse Events Including Serious Adverse Device EffectsIris adhesions0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With Ocular Serious Adverse Events Including Serious Adverse Device EffectsDiabetic retinal oedema0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With Ocular Serious Adverse Events Including Serious Adverse Device EffectsIntra-ocular injection0.0 percentage of participants
PanOptix Toric Trifocal IOL - Second EyePercentage of Subjects With Ocular Serious Adverse Events Including Serious Adverse Device EffectsIris adhesions2.0 percentage of participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026