A multicenter retrospective case series evaluated real-world visual and safety outcomes of the enVista Aspire (EA) and enVista Aspire Toric (ETA) enhanced monofocal IOLs in 141 eyes (84 patients, ages 62–84) across 6 US cataract surgery centers, with follow-up from ~days 1–6 to 4 months postoperatively.
At the last postoperative visit, monocular CDVA ≥20/25 was achieved by 97.2% (EA) and 94.9% (ETA) of eyes; monocular UDVA ≥20/25 by 71.3% (EA) and 84.9% (ETA); monocular UIVA ≥20/32 by 76.6% (EA) and 93.0% (ETA); binocular UIVA ≥20/32 by 100% of patients. Mean SEQ was −0.06 ± 0.30 D (EA) and 0.00 ± 0.32 D (ETA). No serious adverse events were documented.
- No control group (e.g., standard monofocal IOL), so comparative efficacy for intermediate vision cannot be determined. - Convenience sampling by surgeons introduces selection bias; follow-up was short (up to ~4 months) and inconsistent across patients. - The Aspire IOL's effect on contrast sensitivity and visual disturbances (glare, halo) was not clinically evaluated, per the device labeling itself.
Enhanced monofocal IOLs (enVista Aspire / Aspire Toric) delivered good distance and functional intermediate vision in routine cataract surgery, with 100% binocular UIVA ≥20/32. Clinicians should counsel patients that contrast sensitivity and dysphotopsia effects remain uncharacterized in formal clinical trials.
Explore related topics
