To compare visual performance after microincision cataract surgery (MICS) with the implantation of the Akreos MI-60 (MI-60) intraocular lens (IOL) through a 1.8-mm microincision with that after conventional cataract surgery with implantation of the Akreos Adapt-AO IOL (Adapt-AO).

All MICS procedures were performed by the same surgeon. The MI-60 was implanted into 25 eyes, and the Adapt-AO was place in 28 eyes. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), total high-order-aberration (HOA), contrast sensitivity, and surgically- induced astigmatism (SIA) were recorded one-week, one-month, and four-months postoperatively.

There were no statistically significant differences in BCVA between eyes implanted with the MI-60 or those with the Adapt-AO (MI-60 vs. Adapt-AO, 0.09±0.11 at baseline (logMAR), 0.11±0.08 at one-week, 0.06±0.07, 0.06±0.06 at one-month, 0.05±0.06, 0.06±0.05 at four-months according to the Mann-Whitney U test, p >0.05). Refractive errors were significantly less with the Adapt-AO than with the MI-60 (MI-60 vs. Adapt-AO, -0.50±0.43 at baseline (diopter), -0.06±0.39 at one-week, -0.50±0.41, 0.01±0.57 at one-month, -0.46±0.36, 0.08±0.58 at four-months according to the Mann-Whitney U test, p <0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in total HOA or contrast sensitivity between eyes implanted with the MI-60 and those implanted with the Adapt-AO. SIAs were significantly reduced in eyes implanted with the MI-60 than in those with the Adapt-AO at one-month and four-months postoperatively (Mann-Whitney U test, p <0.05).

Implantation with either the MI-60 or the Adapt-AO produced clinically acceptable outcomes, including good spherical aberration and contrast sensitivity. Furthermore, implantation with the MI-60 caused less SIA at one- and four-months postoperation, as compared to that with the Adapt-AO.