Accuracy of 24 IOL Power Calculation Methods.

PURPOSE: To scrutinize the accuracy of 24 intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas in unoperated eyes. METHODS: In a series of consecutive patients undergoing phacoemulsification and implantation of the Tecnis 1 ZCB00 IOL (Johnson & Johnson Vision), the following formulas were evaluated: Barrett Universal II, Castrop, EVO 2.0, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Hoffer QST, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Holladay 2 (AL Adjusted), K6 (Cooke), Kane, Karmona, LSF AI, Naeser 2, OKULIX, Olsen (OLCR), Olsen (standalone), Panacea, PEARL-DGS, RBF 3.0, SRK/T, T2, VRF, and VRF-G. The IOLMaster 700 (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG) was used for biometric measurements. With optimized lens constants, the mean prediction error (PE) and its standard deviation (SD), the median absolute error (MedAE), the mean absolute error (MAE), and the percentage of eyes with prediction erros within ±0.25, ±0.50, ±0.75, ±1.00, and ±2.00 D were analyzed. RESULTS: Three hundred eyes of 300 patients were enrolled. The heteroscedastic method revealed statistically significant differences (P < .05) among formulas. Newly developed methods such as the VRF-G (standard deviation [SD] ±0.387 D), Kane (SD ±0.395 D), Hoffer QST (SD ±0.404 D), and Barrett Universal II (SD ±0.405) were more accurate than older formulas (P < .05). These formulas also yielded the highest percentage of eyes with a PE within ±0.50 D (84.33%, 82.33%, 83.33%, and 81.33%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Newer formulas (Barrett Universal II, Hoffer QST, K6, Kane, Karmona, RBF 3.0, PEARL-DGS, and VRF-G) were the most accurate predictors of postoperative refractions. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(4):249-256.].

Spotlight on the Corneal Back Surface Astigmatism: A Review.

Recent evidence indicates that the corneal back surface astigmatism (CBSA) contributes to the refractive state of the eye in cataract surgery, especially with the implantation of toric intraocular lenses. But this has been met with some scepticism. A review of key studies performed over the past three decades shows that the mean CBSA power ranges from 0.18(±0.16)D to 1.04(±0.20)D. The clinical assessment of CBSA is problematic. There is poor agreement between the current automated systems for assessment of CBSA and it is assumed that these systems directly measure the CBSA. But CBSA cannot be measured directly in vivo. A historical review of methods used to quantify the curvature of the posterior corneal surface reveals that CBSA estimated by current systems is based on values for corneal front surface astigmatism, corneal refractive index, central corneal thickness, corneal thickness at peripheral locations and the exact distance between the corneal apex and each one of these peripheral locations. Doubts and errors in these values, coupled with the precise details of the algorithm incorporated to estimate CBSA, are the likely sources of the lack of agreement between current systems. These systematic errors cloud the assessment of CBSA. Mean CBSA may be low, but it varies from case to case. There is a clear need for a realistic, practical procedure for clinicians to independently calibrate systems for estimating CBSA. This would help to reduce uncertainty and the discrepancies between instruments designed to measure the same parameter.

The effect of corneal crosslinking on the rigidity of the cornea estimated using a modified algorithm for the Schiøtz tonometer.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to test a method for estimating corneal rigidity before and after cross-linking (CXL) using a Schiøtz tonometer. Methods: The study was performed in the Kyiv City Clinical Ophthalmological Hospital "Eye Microsurgical Center", Ukraine. This was a prospective, consecutive, randomized, masked, case-by-case, clinical study. Corneal rigidity, indicated by the gradient (G) between lg applied weight and corresponding lg scale reading during Schiøtz tonometry, were obtained by increasing (A-mode) then reducing (D-mode) weights by two operators [A] in keratoconus, post-CXL and control subjects for estimation of (i) interoperator and (ii) intersessional errors, (iii) intergroup differences; [B] before and after CXL. Central corneal thickness CCT was measured by scanning slit pachymetry. ANOVA, t tests, linear regression were the statistical tools used. Results: Average interoperator difference (ΔG) was -0.120 (SD = ±0.294, 95%CI = -0.175 to -0.066). A significant correlation between ΔG and the mean of each pair of G values was found (r = -0.196, n = 112, P = 0.038). Intersessional differences in mean G values were insignificant (P > 0.05). There was a significant correlation between G at first session (X1) and difference between sessions (ΔG) [Operator 1, ΔG = 0.598x1-0.461, r = 0.601, n = 27, P = 0.009]. Significant intergroup differences in G were found (Operator 1, one-way ANOVA, F = 4.489, P = 0.014). The difference (Δ) between the pre-(X2) and post-CXL treatment G values was significantly associated with the pre-CXL treatment value (Operator 1, Δ = 1.970x2-1.622, r = 0.642, n = 18, P = <.001). G values were correlated with CCT in keratoconus and post-CXL. Conclusion: Corneal rigidity (G) estimated using the Schiøtz tonometer can be useful for detecting changes after CXL. However, G values are linked to CCT, can vary from time-to-time and the procedure is operator dependent.

Effect of Cataract Surgery on the Refractive Index of the Cornea Estimated by Optical Pachymetry.

PURPOSE: To noninvasively estimate the refractive index (RI) of the central cornea along the antero-posterior direction before and after routine phacoemulsification. METHODS: Using 2 setups for a standard optical pachymeter, the ratio of observed optical section widths (OSWs) is a function of the RI. Thus, the corneal RI could be estimated using a calibration equating OSW ratios with known RI values. The OSW was measured by 2 observers for 1) normal subjects for estimating interoperator errors and effects of sex and age on the RI and 2) before and after patients underwent routine phacoemulsification. RESULTS: First, the average interoperator difference (ΔRI) was +0.0005 (SD = ±0.0044, 95% confidence limit, -0.0002 to +0.0012). The root mean square difference between measurements obtained by the observers was 0.0032. There was a significant correlation between the ΔRI and the mean of each pair of measured values (r = -0.172, n = 153, P = 0.003). The mean RI (±SD) was 1.435 (±0.005, n = 82) for females and 1.429 (±0.005, n = 71) for males. There was no significant between-sex difference or association between the RI and age (mean age, ±SD, and range, 44.31, 20.38, and 19-88 years, respectively). Second, the difference (y) between the preoperative (x) and postoperative RI was, y = 0.844x - 1.203 (r = 0.694, n = 31, P ≤ 0.001) according to observer 1 and according to observer 2, y = 0.755x - 1.108 (r = 0.681, n = 31, P ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The RI of the human cornea along the antero-posterior axis can be estimated using a modified application of traditional optical pachymetry. The average values for the corneal RI were higher compared with those reported in previous reports. The change in the RI after phacoemulsification could be predicted from the preoperative value.