Accuracy of Traditional and Modern Formulas for Intraocular Lens Power Calculation After Radial Keratotomy Using Standard Keratometry.

Purpose: To compare the accuracy of multiple traditional and modern intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas in post-radial keratotomy (RK) patients undergoing cataract surgery. Methods: This retrospective case series included 50 eyes with prior RK who underwent routine phacoemulsification surgery with single-piece acrylic IOL implantation (A constant = 118.8). Outcomes of multiple formulas were calculated. Included formulas were SRK/T, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Haigis, Barrett True-K, Haigis and Barrett True-K (target refraction of 0.50 D), Barrett Universal II, Kane, PEARL-DGS, Shammas no history, DK SRK/T, DK SRK/T (target refraction of 0.50 D), Double K (DK) Holladay 1, and DK Holladay 1 (target refraction of 0.50 D). Averages of multiple combinations of best-performing single formulas were calculated. Primary outcome is mean absolute error (MAE). Results: Haigis (with -0.50 D target refraction) and DK SRK/T showed the lowest mean and median absolute errors (MedAE) followed by Haigis, Barrett True-K, and Barrett True-K (with -0.50 D target refraction). Combinations of 3, 4, or 5 of best performing single formulas yielded good results with >60% of cases within +0.50 D of intended refraction and MAE around 0.50 D. The best performing formulas with flatter K readings were PEARL-DGS and Haigis (with additional -0.50 D target refraction) with MAE of 0.72 + 0.71 D and 0.70 + 0.70 D, respectively, followed by Barrett True-K (with intended -0.50 D target refraction) with MAE of 0.75 + 0.63 D. Conclusion: Using an average of three or more Haigis (with -0.50 D target refraction), the Barrett True-K, DK Holladay 1, and DK SRK/T formulas showed better outcomes than using a single formula for IOLMaster 700 standard K readings. The PEARL-DGS formula showed better accuracy in eyes with flatter K readings (<38 D).

Comparative Evaluation of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas in Children.

Introduction With the advent of newer microsurgical techniques, the results for cataract surgery have become quite promising. An accurate intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation is one of the most important factors in optimizing the results. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of four IOL power calculation formulas, namely, Barrett Universal II, Holladay 1, SRK/T and Hoffer Q, using optical biometry in children undergoing cataract surgery with primary IOL implantation. Methods This was a cross-sectional study. A total of 60 eyes of 42 children aged 5-16 years with congenital cataract and having undergone uneventful cataract surgery with IOL implantation were included in the study. Eyes were divided into three groups based on the axial length (AL): short (AL <22.00 mm), medium (AL 22-24.50 mm) and medium long (AL 24.50-26.00 mm). Optical biometry was used and the IOL power was calculated using the Barrett Universal II formula. The predicted postoperative refraction with the other three formulas, namely, SRK/T, Holladay 1 and Hoffer Q, using the same IOL power was estimated. This was compared with the actual postoperative refraction (spherical equivalent at 12 weeks) to give the absolute prediction error. The mean of all absolute prediction errors gave the mean absolute prediction error (MAE) values for each formula that were then compared. Results The MAE was 0.64 ± 0.73 for Barrett Universal II, 0.7 ± 0.72 for Holladay 1, 0.71 ± 0.65 for Hoffer Q and 0.8 ± 0.75 for SRK/T. Thus, Barrett Universal II had the lowest MAE across the whole group. The difference in the MAEs was not statistically significant. Conclusion Barrett Universal II had the lowest MAE and thus was predictable for the highest number of eyes in our study, although this was not statistically significant (p=0.176).

Accuracy of Six Intraocular Lens Power Calculations in Eyes with Axial Lengths Greater than 28.0 mm.

The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of several intraocular (IOL) lens power calculation formulas in long eyes. This was a single-site retrospective consecutive case series that reviewed patients with axial lengths (AL) > 28.0 mm who underwent phacoemulsification. The Wang−Koch (WK) adjustment and Cooke-modified axial length (CMAL) adjustment were applied to Holladay 1 and SRK/T. The median absolute error (MedAE) and the percentage of eyes with prediction errors ±0.25 diopters (D), ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D were used to analyze the formula's accuracy. This study comprised a total of 35 eyes from 25 patients. The Kane formula had the lowest MedAE of all the formulas, but all were comparable except Holladay 1, which had a significantly lower prediction accuracy with either AL adjustment. The SRK/T formula with the CMAL adjustment had the highest accuracy in predicting the formula outcome within ±0.50 D. The newer formulas (BU-II, EVO, Hill-RBF version 3.0, and Kane) were all equally predictable in long eyes. The SRK/T formula with the CMAL adjustment was comparable to these newer formulas with better outcomes than the WK adjustment. The Holladay 1 with either AL adjustment had the lowest predictive accuracy.

Accuracy of Various Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas in Steep Corneas.

PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of four different intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas for eyes with mean keratometry values greater than 46 diopters (D). METHODS: Forty five eyes from 45 patients who were candidates for senile cataract surgery with mean keratometry values greater than 46 D were included. Calculation of the IOL power was performed by the Lenstar. The implanted IOL in all cases was Acrysof SA60AT. The average absolute value of the differences between the actual and predicted spherical equivalent (SE) of the postoperative refractive error (mean absolute error: MAE) was calculated using 4 formulas (Haigis, Holladay 1, Hoffer Q, and SRK/T) with optical IOL constants from the User Group for Laser Interference Biometry constants. RESULTS: The MAE was smallest in the SRK/T formula (0.39 D ± 0.35) followed by those of the Holladay 1 (0.44 D ± 0.32), Haigis (0.45 D ± 0.35) and Hoffer Q (0.5 D ± 0.38) formulas. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the MAE among different formulas. The SRK/T formula predicted more eyes within ± 0.5 D of the SE (77.8%) compared to other formulas. CONCLUSION: In eyes with steep corneas, there were no statistically significant differences among the accuracies of the four common IOL power calculation formulas.