Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Highly Myopic Eyes

Zhang, Yichi; Liang, Xiao; Liu, Shu; Lee, Jacky; Srinivasan, Bhaskar; Lam, Dennis S.C.

doi:10.1155/2016/1917268

Cited by 44 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As the latest formula, excellent agreement by the two biometers was demonstrated in Barrett Universal II formula in the present study, this might due to the excellent agreement found in the AL and ACD measurements as discussed above. The findings by the present study that Haigis and Barrett Universal II formulas provided the most reliable and accurate IOL power prediction was also supported by other studies [23][24][25][26] .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Agreement of ocular biometric measurements in young healthy eyes between IOLMaster 700 and OA-2000

Liao

Peng

Liu

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This prospective cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate the agreement of two new biometers for measuring ocular biometric parameters in young healthy eyes. ocular biometric parameters were measured using IOLMaster 700 and OA-2000. Power vector analyses of Cartesian (J0) and oblique (J45) components of corneal astigmatism were performed. The right eyes of 103 healthy volunteers were analyzed. The 95% limits of agreement ranged from −0.03 to 0.03 mm, −0.08 to 0.07 mm, −0.18 to 0.18 diopters (D), −1.09 to 1.16 D, −1.18 to 1.15 D for axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth (ACD), mean keratometry, J0 and J45 respectively, which were all comparable between the two biometers, while significant differences were detected in lens thickness (LT), central corneal thickness (CCT), whiteto-white (WTW) and pupil diameter (PD). Predicted intraocular lens (IOL) powers were comparable between the two biometers by Haigis and Barrett Universal II formulas, while not by SRK/T, Hoffer Q and Holladay 2. Excepting CCT, WTW and PD meaurements, IOLMaster 700 and OA-2000 have excellent agreement on ocular biometric measurements and astigmatism power vectors, which provides more options for ocular biometric measurements and enables constant optimization for IOL power calculation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Agreement of ocular biometric measurements in young healthy eyes between IOLMaster 700 and OA-2000

Liao

Peng

Liu

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to the clinical survey of the Japanese Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery in 2018, [1] the SRK/T formula is currently still the most used formula for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in Japan. [2] Recently, it has been demonstrated that the Barrett Universal II formula provided a higher predictability than the SRK/T formula, especially in eyes with long axial length [3][4][5][6][7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Predictability Using Barrett Universal II and SRK/T Formulas according to Keratometry

Iijima

Kamiya

Iida

et al. 2020

Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose. To compare the predictability of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation using the Barrett Universal II and the SRK/T formulas, according to the keratometry. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical charts of 335 consecutive eyes undergoing standard cataract surgery. IOL power calculations were performed using the Barrett Universal II and the SRK/T formulas. We compared the prediction error, the absolute error, and the percentages within ±0.25, ±0.5, and ±1.0 D of the targeted refraction, 1 month postoperatively, and also investigated the relationship of these outcomes with the keratometric readings, using the two formulas. Results. The prediction error using the SRK/T formula was significantly more myopic than that using the Barrett Universal II formula (the paired t-test, p<0.001). The absolute error using the SRK/T formula was significantly larger than that using the Barrett Universal II formula (p=0.006). We found a significant correlation between the prediction error and the keratometric readings using the SRK/T formula (Pearson correlation coefficient, r = −0.522, p<0.001), but there was no significant correlation between them using the Barrett Universal II formula (r = −0.031, p=0.576). Conclusions. The Barrett Universal II formula provides a better predictability of IOL power calculation and is less susceptible to the effect of the corneal shape, than the SRK/T formula. The Barrett Universal formula, instead of the SRK/T formula, may be clinically helpful for improving the refractive accuracy, especially in eyes with steep or flat corneas.

show abstract

“…Compared with the previous three generations of formulas, the fourth-generation formula takes the effective IOL position (ELP) into account, and to some extent realizes the individualization of the IOL calculation. Recently, the fifth-generation formula Barrett Universal II has been applied to the clinic 15 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Intraocular Lens power calculation after laser refractive surgery: A Meta-Analysis

Chen

Wang

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

there are an increasing number of people who have had refractive surgery now developing cataract. To compare the accuracy of different intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas after laser refractive surgery (photorefractive keratectomy or laser in situ keratomileusis), a comprehensive literature search of pubMed and eMBASe was conducted to identify comparative cohort studies and case series comparing different formulas: Haigis-L, Shammas-PL, SRK/T, Holladay 1 and Hoffer Q. Seven cohort studies and three observational studies including 260 eyes were identified. There were significant differences when Hoffer Q formula compared with SRK/T, Holladay 1. Holladay 1 formula produced less prediction error than SRK/T formula in double-K method. Hoffer Q formula performed best among SRK/T and Holladay 1 formulas in total and single-K method. In eyes with previous data, it is recommended to choose double-K formula except SRK/T formula. In eyes with no previous data, Haigis-L formula is recommended if available, if the fourth formula is unavailable, single-k Hoffer Q is a good choice.

show abstract

Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Highly Myopic Eyes

Cited by 44 publications

References 25 publications

Agreement of ocular biometric measurements in young healthy eyes between IOLMaster 700 and OA-2000

Agreement of ocular biometric measurements in young healthy eyes between IOLMaster 700 and OA-2000

Comparison of Predictability Using Barrett Universal II and SRK/T Formulas according to Keratometry

Intraocular Lens power calculation after laser refractive surgery: A Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About