No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The present study is a retrospective, monocentric case series that aims to compare the second-eye IOL power calculation precision using the back-calculated lens position (LP) as a lens position predictor versus using a predetermined correction factor (CF) for thin- and thick-lens IOL calculation formulas. A set of 878 eyes from 439 patients implanted with Finevision IOLs (BVI PhysIOL, Liège, Belgium) with both operated eyes was used as a training set to create Haigis-LP and PEARL-LP formulas, using the back-calculated lens position of the contralateral eye as an effective lens position (ELP) predictor. Haigis-CF, Barrett-CF, and PEARL-CF formulas using an optimized correction factor based on the prediction error of the first eye were also designed. A different set of 1500 eyes from 1500 patients operated in the same center was used to compare the basal and enhanced formula performances. The IOL power calculation for the second eye was significantly enhanced by adapting the formulas using the back-calculated ELP of the first eye or by using a correction factor based on the prediction error of the first eye, the latter giving slightly higher precision. A decrease in the mean absolute error of 0.043 D was observed between the basal PEARL and the PEARL-CF formula (p < 0.001). The optimal correction factor was close to 60% of the first-eye prediction error for every formula. A fixed correction factor of 60% of the postoperative refractive error of the first operated eye improves the second-eye refractive outcome better than the methods based on the first eye’s effective lens position back-calculation. A significant interocular biometric dissimilarity precludes the enhancement of the second-eye IOL power calculation according to the first-eye results.

No abstract