Prospective functional and clinical comparison of bilateral ReZoom and ReSTOR intraocular lenses in patients 70 years or younger.

PURPOSE To compare clinical outcomes, functional vision, and spectacle freedom in patients 70 years or younger with bilateral ReSTOR (Alcon Laboratories) or ReZoom (Advanced Medical Optics) intraocular lenses (IOLs). SETTING Private practice, Los Altos, California, USA. METHODS Thirty patients had nonrandomized bilateral implantation of a ReZoom or ReSTOR multifocal IOL. Patients were 70 years or younger with operable bilateral cataracts and otherwise healthy eyes. Outcome measures recorded 6 months postoperatively were uncorrected (UCVA) and distance-corrected (far, intermediate, near) visual acuities, contrast sensitivity (photopic, mesopic, mesopic with glare), pupil size, and stereopsis. Patients completed a quality-of-life questionnaire and an interactive functional evaluation using real-life props. RESULTS The UCVA at all distances was excellent in both groups, with the ReSTOR IOL performing significantly better at 31 cm. This near superiority was also evident with distance correction or at the patient's preferred reading distance and correlated with subjective and functional vision testing results. Intermediate vision at 50 cm was comparable. The incidence of halos was similar; however, severity was higher in the ReZoom group, with 2 of 15 patients refusing a second IOL for this reason. Spectacle freedom was achieved by 50.0% in the ReZoom group and 72.7% in the ReSTOR group. CONCLUSIONS Both multifocal IOL designs provided excellent UCVA. ReSTOR patients had better clinical and functional vision at near and comparable clinical and functional intermediate performance. Halos were more severe in the ReZoom group. Although the ReSTOR IOL gave higher rates of spectacle freedom, patient satisfaction was high in both groups.