Causal inference for time-to-event data with a cured subpopulation.

When studying the treatment effect on time-to-event outcomes, it is common that some individuals never experience failure events, which suggests that they have been cured. However, the cure status may not be observed due to censoring which makes it challenging to define treatment effects. Current methods mainly focus on estimating model parameters in various cure models, ultimately leading to a lack of causal interpretations. To address this issue, we propose 2 causal estimands, the timewise risk difference and mean survival time difference, in the always-uncured based on principal stratification as a complement to the treatment effect on cure rates. These estimands allow us to study the treatment effects on failure times in the always-uncured subpopulation. We show the identifiability using a substitutional variable for the potential cure status under ignorable treatment assignment mechanism, these 2 estimands are identifiable. We also provide estimation methods using mixture cure models. We applied our approach to an observational study that compared the leukemia-free survival rates of different transplantation types to cure acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Our proposed approach yielded insightful results that can be used to inform future treatment decisions.

[Changes in intraocular pressure and biometric parameters of the anterior segment of the eye after intravitreal injections]. / Izmeneniya urovnya vnutriglaznogo davleniya i biometricheskikh pokazatelei perednego segmenta glaza posle intravitreal'nykh in"ektsii.

PURPOSE: This study compares the changes in the parameters of the anterior chamber of the eye using anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) in patients with a natural and artificial lens after treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) by multiple intravitreal injections (IVI) of anti-VEGF drugs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The patients were divided into 2 groups: group 1 (control) included 30 patients (30 eyes) with a natural lens, group 2 - 30 patients (30 eyes) with an intraocular lens (IOL). AS-OCT was performed using the Revo NX tomograph (Optopol, Poland) to analyze anterior chamber depth (ACD) and the parameters of anterior chamber angle (ACA). Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured with a contact tonometer ICare Pro. RESULTS: In patients with an IOL, the IOP level 1 minute after intravitreal injection (IVI) of an anti-VEGF drug was statistically lower than in the control group, on average by 17.8% during the first IVI and by 28.7% after 1 year of observation (p<0.001). ACD before treatment was statistically significantly higher in patients with IOL compared to patients of group 1 by an average of 39.3% (p<0.001). ACA from the nasal and temporal sides in the meridian 0°-180° before the start of treatment was statistically significantly wider in phakic patients than in the control group, by an average of 15.9±9.3° (p<0.001) and 16.9±8.2° (p<0.001), respectively. According to AS-OCT, there was no shift of the iris-lens diaphragm in patients with an IOL after multiple IVI of an anti-VEGF drug, in contrast to the control group. CONCLUSIONS: AS-OCT was used to determine for the first time the changes in the parameters of the anterior chamber of the eye in patients with a natural and artificial lens after multiple injections of an anti-VEGF drug in the treatment of nAMD.

Vector analysis of corneal astigmatism in cataractous eyes based on IOLMaster 700 biometry.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of the corneal back surface by comparing the keratometric astigmatism (K, derived from the corneal front surface) of a modern optical biometer against astigmatism of Total Keratometry (TK, derived from both corneal surfaces) in a large population with cataractous eyes. The results were then used to define linear prediction models to map K to TK. METHODS: From a large dataset containing bilateral biometric measurements (IOLMaster 700) in 9736 patients prior to cataract surgery, the total corneal astigmatism was decomposed into vectors for K, corneal back surface (BS), and TK. A multivariate prediction model (MV), simplified model with separation of vector components (SM) and a constant model (CM) were defined to map K to TK vector components. RESULTS: The K centroid (X/Y) showed some astigmatism with-the-rule (0.1981/-0.0211 dioptre (dpt)) whereas the TK centroid was located around zero (-0.0071/-0.0381 dpt against-the-rule) and the BS centroid showed systematic astigmatism against-the-rule (-0.2367/-0.0145 dpt). The respective TK-K centroid was located at -0.2052/-0.0302 dpt. The MV model showed the same performance (i.e. mean absolute residuum) as the SM did (0.1098 and 0.1099 dpt respectively) while the CM performed only slightly worse (0.1121 dpt mean absolute residuum). CONCLUSION: In cases where tomographic data are unavailable statistical models could be used to consider the overall contribution of the back surface to the total corneal astigmatism. Since the performance of the CM is sufficiently close to that of MV and SM we recommend using the CM which can be directly considered e.g. as surgically induced astigmatism.

Repeatability assessment of anterior segment measurements in myopic patients using an anterior segment OCT with placido corneal topography and agreement with a swept-source OCT.

BACKGROUND: The precision of anterior segment biometric measurements in eyes has become increasingly important in refractive surgery. The purpose of this study is to assess the repeatability of the automatic measurements provided by a new spectral-domain optical coherence tomograph (SD-OCT)/Placido topographer (MS-39, CSO) and its agreement with a swept-source OCT (SS-OCT) biometer (CASIA SS-1000, Tomey) in patients with myopia. METHODS: The right eye of 235 subjects was scanned 3 times with both devices. The evaluated parameters included central corneal radius of the steep meridian, central corneal radius of the flat meridian, mean central corneal radius, thinnest corneal thickness, central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth, corneal volume and diameter. The intraobserver repeatability of the MS-39 measurements was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), within subject standard deviation, coefficient of repeatability, coefficient of variation and repeated-measures analysis of variance of the 3 repeated measurements. The agreement between the two devices was evaluated by 95% limits of agreement (LoA). RESULTS: The majority of the parameters acquired from MS-39 showed high repeatability. The repeatability of corneal diameter was slightly lower than the other measurements, although the ICC remained high. Agreement with the CASIA SS-1000 was good, indicated by the Bland-Altman plots with narrow 95% LoA values for all parameters assessed. CONCLUSIONS: The high repeatability of automatic measurements by the new device supports its clinical application in eyes with myopia, and the good agreement between the two devices indicates they could be used interchangeably for the parameters evaluated.

Differences Between Simulated Keratometry and Total Corneal Power in Eyes With Keratoconus and a Formula to Improve IOL Power Calculation Results.

PURPOSE: To compare simulated keratometry (SimK) and total corneal power (TCP) in keratoconic eyes, to determine whether the differences are systematic and predictable and to evaluate an adjusted TCP-based formula for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation. METHODS: In a consecutive series of keratoconic eyes, measurements of SimK, TCP, posterior keratometry, and anterior and posterior corneal asphericities (Q-values) were retrospectively collected. The difference between SimK and TCP was linearly correlated to the biometric parameters. In a separate sample of keratoconic eyes that had undergone cataract surgery, IOL power was calculated with the Barrett Universal II, Hoffer QST, Holladay 1, Kane, and SRK/T formulas using the SimK and an adjusted TCP power. The respective prediction errors were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 382 keratoconic eyes (271 patients) were enrolled. An increasing overestimation of SimK by TCP was detected from stage I to III, with a significant correlation between the SimK and TCP difference and SimK in the whole sample (P < .0001, r2 = 0.1322). Approximately 7% of cases presented an underestimation of SimK by TCP. IOL power calculation with the adjusted TCP improved outcomes, achieving a maximum of 80% of eyes with a prediction error within ±0.50 diopters with the Hoffer QST, Holladay 1, and Kane formulas. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, SimK overestimated TCP. Such a difference could not be predicted by any variable. The proposed TCP-adjustment formula (TCPadj = TCP + 0.56 diopters) in keratoconic eyes for IOL power calculation might be valuable for improving refractive outcomes. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(4):e253-e259.].

Interchangeability in Automated Corneal Diameter Measurements Across Different Biometric Devices: A Systematic Review of Agreement Studies.

PURPOSE: To provide an up-to-date review of the agreement in automated white-to-white (WTW) measurement between the latest topographic and biometric devices. METHODS: In this systematic review, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched for articles published between 2017 and 2023, focusing on WTW agreement studies on adult, virgin eyes, with or without cataract and no other ocular comorbidities. Studies evaluating WTW measurements performed with autokeratometers, manual calipers, or manual image analysis were excluded. When available, the following metrics for the agreement of WTW measurements between pairs of devices were included: mean difference ± standard deviation, 95% limits of agreement (LoA), LoA width, 95% confidence interval (95 CI%), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: Forty-one studies, covering comparisons for 19 devices, were included. Altogether, 81 paired comparisons were performed for 4,595 eyes of 4,002 individuals. The mean difference in WTW measurements between devices ranged from 0.01 mm up to 0.96 mm, with varying CI. The 95% LoA width ranged from 0.31 to 2.45 mm (median: 0.65 mm). The majority of pairwise comparisons reported LoA wider than 0.5 mm, a clinically significant value for phakic intraocular lens sizing. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly all analyzed studies demonstrated the lack of interchangeability of the WTW parameter. The corneal diameter, assessed by means of grayscale en-face image analysis, tended to demonstrate the lowest agreement among devices compared to other measured biometric parameters. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(3):e182-e194.].

Association of refractive outcome with postoperative anterior chamber depth measured with 3 optical biometers.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the relationship between refractive outcomes and postoperative anterior chamber depth (ACD, measured from corneal epithelium to lens) measured by swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT), optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR), and Scheimpflug devices under the undilated pupil. METHODS: Patients undergoing cataract phacoemulsification with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in a hospital setting were enrolled. Postoperative ACD (postACD) was performed with an SS-OCT device, an OLCR device, and a Scheimpflug device at least 1 month after cataract surgery. After adjusting the mean predicted error to 0, differences in refractive outcomes were calculated with the Olsen formula using actual postACD measured from 3 devices and predicted value. RESULTS: Overall, this comparative case study included 69 eyes of 69 patients, and postACD measurements were successfully taken using all 3 devices. The postACD measured with the SS-OCT, OLCR, and Scheimpflug devices was 4.59 ± 0.30, 4.50 ± 0.30, and 4.54 ± 0.32 mm, respectively. Statistically significant differences in postACD were found among 3 devices (P < 0.001), with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman showing good agreement. No significant difference in median absolute error was found with the Olsen formula using actual postACD obtained with 3 devices. Percentage prediction errors were within ± 0.50 D in 65% (OLCR), 70% (Scheimpflug), and 67% (SS-OCT) calculated by actual postACD versus 64% by predicted value. CONCLUSION: Substantial agreement was found in postACD measurements obtained from the SS-OCT, OLCR, and Scheimpflug devices, with a trend toward comparable refractive outcomes in the Olsen formula. Meanwhile, postACD measurements may be potentially superior for the additional enhancement of refractive outcomes.

Impact of segmented optical axial length on the performance of intraocular lens power calculation formulas.

PURPOSE: To investigate the difference between the segmented axial length (AL) and the composite AL on a swept-source optical coherence tomography biometer and to evaluate the subsequent effects on artificial intelligence intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations: the Kane and Hill-RBF 3.0 formulas compared with established vergence formulas. SETTING: National Hospital Organization, Tokyo Medical Center, Japan. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing cataract surgery with a single-piece IOL were reviewed. The prediction accuracy of the Barrett Universal II, Haigis, Hill-RBF 3.0, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Kane, and SRK/T formulas based on 2 ALs were compared for each formula. The heteroscedastic test was used with the SD of prediction errors as the endpoint for formula performance. RESULTS: The study included 145 eyes of 145 patients. The segmented AL (24.83 ± 1.89) was significantly shorter than the composite AL (24.88 ± 1.96, P < .001). Bland-Altman analysis revealed a negative proportional bias for the differences between the segmented AL and the composite AL. The SD values obtained by Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T formulas based on the segmented AL (0.52 diopters [D], 0.54 D, and 0.50 D, respectively) were significantly lower than those based on the composite AL (0.57 D, 0.60 D, and 0.52 D, respectively, P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The segmented ALs were longer in short eyes and shorter in long eyes than the composite ALs. The refractive accuracy can be improved in the Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T formulas by changing the composite ALs to the segmented ALs.

Comparison of Pre- and Post-DMEK Keratometry and Total Keratometry Values for IOL Power Calculations in Eyes Undergoing Triple DMEK.

PURPOSE: To evaluate prediction accuracy of pre- and post-DMEK keratometry (K) and total keratometry (TK) values for IOL power calculations in Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) eyes undergoing DMEK with cataract surgery (triple DMEK). METHODS: Retrospective cross-sectional multicenter study of 55 FECD eyes (44 patients) that underwent triple DMEK between 2019 and 2022 between two centers in USA and Europe. Swept-source optical coherence tomography biometry (IOLMaster 700) was used for pre- and post-DMEK measurements. K and TK values were used for power calculations with ten formulae (Barrett Universal II (BUII), Castrop, Cooke K6, EVO 2.0, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Hoffer QST, Holladay I, Kane, and SRK/T). Mean error, mean absolute error (MAE), standard deviation, and percentage of eyes within ±0.50/±1.00 diopters (D) were calculated. Studied formulae were additionally adjusted using a method published previously (IOLup1D Method), which increases the IOL power by 1D. While both eyes from the same patient were considered for descriptive statistics, we restricted to one eye per individual (44 eyes for statistical comparisons. RESULTS: MAEs for all formulae were lower for post-DMEK K and TK than pre-DMEK K and TK by an average of 0.24 and 0.47 D, respectively. The lowest MAE was 0.49 D for Kane using post-DMEK TK, and the highest MAE was 1.05 D for BUII using pre-DMEK TK. Most IOLup1D formulae had lower MAEs than pre-DMEK K and TK formulae. CONCLUSIONS: The IOLup1D Method should be used instead of pre-DMEK K and TK values for triple DMEK in FECD eyes. Using post-DMEK TK values for cataract surgery after DMEK provides better refractive accuracy than any of the three studied methods used for triple DMEK procedures.

Refractive cataract surgery.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this study to provide an overview of recent publications and opinions in refractive cataract surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: With the advent of intraocular lenses (IOLs) on different platforms, the surgeon has a wide arena of types of IOL to choose, depending on the patient's visual requirement. Optimization of the tear film, integrating tomography and topography devices for appropriate keratometry values, biometry, use of advanced formulas for IOL power calculation and application of newer IOLs can help achieve target refraction in cases scheduled for cataract surgery. Intraoperative aberrometry can be a useful aid for cataract surgery in postrefractive cases and can help minimize residual postoperative astigmatism. SUMMARY: Evolvement and rapid advancement of technology allows to impart desired refractive outcomes in most of the cases postcataract surgery. Appropriate preoperative and intraoperative factors should be considered to achieve the desired postoperative outcome.

Cataract surgery after corneal refractive surgery: preoperative considerations and management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Corneal refractive surgery (CRS) is one of the most popular eye procedures, with more than 40 million cases performed globally. As CRS-treated patients age and develop cataract, the number of cases that require additional preoperative considerations and management will increase around the world. Thus, we provide an up-to-date, concise overview of the considerations and outcomes of cataract surgery in eyes with previous CRS, including surface ablation, laser in-situ keratomileusis (LASIK), and small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). RECENT FINDINGS: Challenges associated with accurate biometry in eyes with CRS have been mitigated recently through total keratometry, ray tracing, intraoperative aberrometry, and machine learning assisted intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas to improve prediction. Emerging studies have highlighted the superior performance of ray tracing and/or total keratometry-based formulas for IOL power calculation in eyes with previous SMILE. Dry eye remains a common side effect after cataract surgery, especially in eyes with CRS, though the risk appears to be lower after SMILE than LASIK (in the short-term). Recent presbyopia-correcting IOL designs such as extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOLs may be suitable in carefully selected eyes with previous CRS. SUMMARY: Ophthalmologists will increasingly face challenges associated with the surgical management of cataract in patients with prior CRS. Careful preoperative assessment of the ocular surface, appropriate use of IOL power calculation formulas, and strategies for presbyopia correction are key to achieve good clinical and refractive outcomes and patient satisfaction. Recent advances in CRS techniques, such as SMILE, may pose new challenges for such eyes in the future.

Refractive outcome in combined phacovitrectomy: Anterior segment changes and corrective factor for IOL power calculation improvement.

PURPOSE: To analyze differences in refractive outcome Δ (difference between postoperative and expected refractive error) and in anterior segment changes between cataract surgery patients and combined phacovitrectomy patients. We also aimed to provide a corrective formula allowing to minimise the refractive outcome Δ in combined surgery patients. METHODS: Candidates for phacoemulsification and combined phacovitrectomy (respectively PHACO and COMBINED groups) were prospectively enrolled in two specialised centres. Patients underwent best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) assessment, ultra-high speed anterior segment optical coherence tomography (OCT), gonioscopy, retinal OCT, slit lamp examination and biometry at baseline, 6 weeks postoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. RESULTS: No differences in refractive Δ, refractive error and anterior segment parameters were noted between PHACO and COMBINED group (109 and 110 patients respectively) at 6 weeks. At 3 months, COMBINED group showed a spherical equivalent of -0.29 ± 0.10 D versus -0.03 ± 0.15 D in PHACO group (p = 0.023). COMBINED group showed a significantly higher Crystalline Lens Rise (CLR), angle-to-angle (ATA) and anterior chamber width (ACW) and a significantly lower anterior chamber depth (ACD) and refractive Δ with all 4 considered formulas at 3 months. For IOL power lower than 15, a hyperopic shift was observed instead. CONCLUSIONS: Anterior segment OCT suggests anterior displacement of the effective lens position in patients undergoing phacovitrectomy. A corrective formula can be applied to IOL power calculation to minimize undesired refractive error.

Refractive Outcomes With New Generation Formulas for Intraocular Lens Power Calculation in Radial Keratotomy Patients.

PURPOSE: Radial keratotomies (RKs) are responsible for corneal irregularities resulting in biometric errors and lower best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) due to lower-order and higher-order optical aberrations. The aim of the study was to compare performances of new and old generation formulas in a population of RK patients. METHODS: RK patients who underwent phacoemulsification with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation were retrospectively recruited. Inclusion criteria were availability of preoperative and 6-month postoperative BCVA assessment, topography, and tomography. Documented refraction instability, corneal ectasia, and previous ocular surgery except for RK were exclusion criteria. Mean prediction error (ME), mean absolute prediction error (MAE), and incidence of MAE > 0.25D were calculated for SRK-T, Barrett True K, EVO 2.0, Kane, and PEARL-DGS. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients with a mean baseline BCVA of 0.32 ± 0.18 logMAR and a mean corneal root mean square (RMS) value of 1.59 ± 0.91 µm were included. EVO 2.0, Kane, and PEARL-DGS showed a significantly lower MAE and lower ME compared with all other formulas ( P < 0.001 and P < 0.001) and a significant lower incidence of MAE >0.25D ( P < 0.001). Significant differences were still detected when using 3-mm mean keratometry for IOL calculation. CONCLUSIONS: PEARL-DGS, Kane, and EVO 2.0 formulas show superior accuracy in IOL power calculation compared with SRK-T and Barrett True K in RK patients, with no significant differences between the 3.

Impact of uncertainties in biometric parameters on intraocular lens power formula predicted refraction using a Monte-Carlo simulation.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the uncertainty in the formula predicted refractive outcome REFU after cataract surgery resulting from measurement uncertainties in modern optical biometers using literature data for within-subject standard deviation Sw. METHODS: This Monte-Carlo simulation study used a large dataset containing 16 667 preoperative IOLMaster 700 biometric measurements. Based on literature Sw values, REFU was derived for both the Haigis and Castrop formulae using error propagation strategies. Using the Hoya Vivinex lens (IOL) as an example, REFU was calculated both with (WLT) and without (WoLT) consideration of IOL power labelling tolerances. RESULTS: WoLT the median REFU was 0.10/0.12 dpt for the Haigis/Castrop formula, and WLT it was 0.13/0.15 dpt. WoLT REFU increased systematically for short eyes (or high power IOLs), and WLT this effect was even more pronounced because of increased labelling tolerances. WoLT the uncertainty in the measurement of the corneal front surface radius showed the largest contribution to REFU, especially in long eyes (and low power IOLs). WLT the IOL power uncertainty dominated in short eyes (or high power IOLs) and the uncertainty of the corneal front surface in long eyes (or low power IOLs). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with published data on the formula prediction error of refractive outcome after cataract surgery, the uncertainty of biometric measures seems to contribute with ⅓ to ½ to the entire standard deviation. REFU systematically increases with IOL power and decreases with axial length.

Accuracy comparison of tomography devices for ray tracing-based intraocular lens calculation.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the interchangeability of different tomography devices used for ray tracing-based intraocular lens (IOL) calculation. SETTING: Eye clinic, Castrop-Rauxel, Germany. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. METHOD: Measurements from 3 Placido-Scheimpflug devices and 3 optical coherence tomography (OCT) devices were compared in 83 and 161 other eyes after cataract surgery, respectively. 2-dimensional matrices of anterior local corneal curvature and local corneal thickness are transferred to the ray-tracing software OKULIX. Calculations are performed with the same IOL in the same position of an eye with the same axial length. Differences in spherical equivalent (SE), astigmatism, and spherical aberration are evaluated. Furthermore, the influence of the size of the matrices (optical zone) on the accuracy is quantified. RESULTS: For the Placido-Scheimpflug devices, the deviations from the average of three measurements taken for each eye in SE (mean ± SD) were 0.17 ± 0.24 diopters (D), -0.26 ± 0.29 D, and 0.08 ± 0.39 D ( P < .001, analysis of variance [ANOVA]), for the centroids of the astigmatic differences 0.04 D/173 degrees, 0.14 D/93 degrees, and 0.10 D/7 degrees, and for the median of the absolute values of the vector differences 0.31 D, 0.33 D, and 0.29 D. For OCT devices, the corresponding results were 0.01 ± 0.21 D, -0.03 ± 0.21 D, and 0.02 ± 0.20 D ( P = .005, ANOVA); 0.18 D/120 degrees, 0.07 D/70 degrees, and 0.22 D/4 degrees; and 0.26 D, 0.30 D, and 0.33 D. The accuracy of the calculated spherical aberrations allows for an individual selection of the best fitting IOL model in most cases. CONCLUSIONS: The differences are small enough to make the devices interchangeable regarding astigmatism and spherical aberration. Although there are significant differences in SE between Scheimpflug and OCT devices, the differences between OCT devices are also small enough to make them interchangeable, but the differences between Placido-Scheimpflug devices are too large to make these devices interchangeable.

Theoretical Accuracy of the Raytracing Method for Intraocular Calculation of Lens Power in Myopic Eyes after Small Incision Extraction of the Lenticule.

AIM: To evaluate the accuracy of the raytracing method for the calculation of intraocular lens (IOL) power in myopic eyes after small incision extraction of the lenticule (SMILE). METHODS: Retrospective study. All patients undergoing surgery for myopic SMILE between May 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020, with Scheimpflug tomography optical biometry were eligible for inclusion. Manifest refraction was performed before and 6 months after refractive surgery. One eye from each patient was included in the final analysis. A theoretical model was invited to predict the accuracy of multiple methods of lens power calculation by comparing the IOL-induced refractive error at the corneal plane (IOL-Dif) and the SMILE-induced change of spherical equivalent (SMILE-Dif) before and after SMILE surgery. The prediction error (PE) was calculated as the difference between SMILE-Dif-IOL-Dif. IOL power calculations were performed using raytracing (Olsen Raytracing, Pentacam AXL, software version 1.22r05, Wetzlar, Germany) and other formulae with historical data (Barrett True-K, Double-K SRK/T, Masket, Modified Masket) and without historical data (Barrett True-K no history, Haigis-L, Hill Potvin Shammas PM, Shammas-PL) for the same IOL power and model. In addition, subgroup analysis was performed in different anterior chamber depths, axial lengths, back-to-front corneal radius ratio, keratometry, lens thickness, and preoperative spherical equivalents. RESULTS: A total of 70 eyes of 70 patients were analyzed. The raytracing method had the smallest mean absolute PE (0.26 ± 0.24 D) and median absolute PE (0.16 D), and also had the largest percentage of eyes within a PE of ± 0.25 D (64.3%), ± 0.50 D (81.4%), ± 0.75 D (95.7%), and ± 1.00 D (100.0%). The raytracing method was significantly better than Double-K SRK/T, Haigis, Haigis-L, and Shammas-PL formulae in postoperative refraction prediction (all p < 0.001), but not better than the following formulae: Barrett True-K (p = 0.314), Barrett True-K no history (p = 0.163), Masket (p = 1.0), Modified Masket (p = 0.806), and Hill Potvin Shammas PM (p = 0.286). Subgroup analysis showed that refractive outcomes exhibited no statistically significant differences in the raytracing method (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Raytracing was the most accurate method in predicting target refraction and had a good consistency in calculating IOL power for myopic eyes after SMILE.

Performance of IOL calculation formulas that use measured posterior corneal power in eyes following myopic laser vision correction.

PURPOSE: To compare the predictive accuracy of the biometer-embedded Barrett True-K TK and new total corneal power methods of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in eyes with prior laser vision correction (LVC) for myopia. SETTING: Academic clinical practice. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: IOL power formulas were assessed using measurements from a swept-source optical coherence biometer. Refractive prediction errors were calculated for the Barrett True-K TK, EVO 2.0, Pearl-DGS, and HofferQST, which use both anterior and posterior corneal curvature measurements. These were compared with the Shammas, Haigis-L, Barrett True-K No History (NH), optical coherence tomography, and 4-formula average (AVG-4) on the ASCRS postrefractive calculator, and to the Holladay 1 and 2 with non linear axial length regressions (H1- and H2-NLR). RESULTS: The study comprised 85 eyes from 85 patients. Only the Barrett True-K TK and EVO 2.0 had mean numerical errors that were not significantly different from 0. The EVO 2.0, Barrett True-K TK, Pearl-DGS, AVG-4, H2-NLR, and Barrett True-K NH were selected for further pairwise analysis. The Barrett True-K TK and EVO 2.0 demonstrated smaller root-mean-square absolute error compared with the Pearl-DGS, and the Barrett True-K TK also had a smaller mean absolute error than the Pearl-DGS. CONCLUSIONS: The Barrett True-K TK and EVO 2.0 formulas had comparable performance to existing formulas in eyes with prior myopic LVC.

Limitations of constant optimization with disclosed intraocular lens power formulae.

PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of formula constants on predicted refraction and limitations of constant optimization for classical and modern intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulae. SETTING: Tertiary care center. DESIGN: Retrospective single-center consecutive case series. METHODS: This analysis is based on a dataset of 888 eyes before and after cataract surgery with IOL implantation (Hoya Vivinex). Spherical equivalent refraction predSEQ was predicted using IOLMaster 700 data, IOL power, and formula constants from IOLCon ( https://iolcon.org ). The formula prediction error (PE) was derived as predSEQ minus achieved spherical equivalent refraction for the SRKT, Hoffer Q, Holladay, Haigis, and Castrop formulae. The gradient of predSEQ (gradSEQ) as a measure for the effect of the constants on refraction was calculated and used for constant optimization. RESULTS: Using initial formula constants, the mean PE was -0.1782 ± 0.4450, -0.1814 ± 0.4159, -0.1702 ± 0.4207, -0.1211 ± 0.3740, and -0.1912 ± 0.3449 diopters (D) for the SRKT, Hoffer Q, Holladay, Haigis, and Castrop formulas, respectively. gradSEQ for all formula constants (except gradSEQ for the Castrop R) decay with axial length because of interaction with the effective lens position (ELP). Constant optimization for a zero mean PE (SD: 0.4410, 0.4307, 0.4272, 0.3742, 0.3436 D) results in a change in the PE trend over axial length in all formulae where the constant acts directly on the ELP. CONCLUSIONS: With IOL power calculation formulae where the constant(s) act directly on the ELP, a change in constant(s) always changes the trend of the PE according to gradSEQ. Formulae where at least 1 constant does not act on the ELP have more flexibility to zero the mean or median PE without coupling with a PE trend error over axial length.

Accuracy of the PEARL-DGS Formula for Intraocular Lens Power Calculation in Post-Myopic Laser Refractive Corneal Surgery Eyes.

PURPOSE: To investigate the accuracy of the PEARL-DGS formula for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in post-myopic laser refractive corneal surgery eyes. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: A total of 139 eyes of 139 patients (mean axial length: 27.4 ± 2.1 mm) who had prior myopic laser refractive corneal surgery and subsequent cataract surgery using Tecnis ZCB00 from March 2018 to February 2023 were included. Refractive outcomes of 5 formulas (Barrett True K, Haigis-L, Hoffer-QST, PEARL-DGS, and Shammas-PL) were evaluated. Prediction error was defined as the difference between the measured and predicted postoperative refractive spherical equivalent using the IOL power actually implanted. Mean prediction error (MPE), median absolute prediction error (MedAE), and mean absolute prediction error were calculated. RESULTS: Without constant optimization, the PEARL-DGS resulted in a MPE of +0.05 ± 0.65 diopters (D), whereas the other formulas resulted in myopic shifts. The MedAEs of the formulas were 0.39, 0.53, 0.65, 0.85, and 1.11 D for the PEARL-DGS, Hoffer-QST, Barrett True K, Shammas-PL, and Haigis-L, respectively, in order of magnitude (P < .05). With constant optimization, there were no statistically significant differences in the MedAEs among the 5 formulas (P = .388). CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to other IOL formulas, the PEARL-DGS resulted in better refractive outcomes after cataract surgery in post-myopic laser refractive corneal surgery eyes without constant optimization. We suggest that PEARL-DGS be considered as the first choice for IOL power calculation in these eyes when the clinicians do not have their optimized constants.

Refractive Predictability between Standard and Total Keratometry during the Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery with Monofocal Intraocular Lens with Enhanced Intermediate Function.

PURPOSE: We aimed to compare the accuracy of the intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formula using the standard keratometry (K) and total K (TK) during the femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) with a monofocal IOL with enhanced intermediate function using currently used formulas. METHODS: A retrospective review of 125 eyes from 125 patients who had undergone FLACS with implantation of monofocal IOL with enhanced intermediate function was conducted. The predicted refractive power was calculated using an optical biometer (IOLmaster 700) according to the K and TK in the Barrett Universal II, SRK/T, Haigis, and Holladay 2 formulas. Absolute prediction error (APE) obtained from the actual postoperative refractive outcomes and the refractive error predicted in each formula was compared one month after surgery. RESULTS: Mean APE ranged between 0.29 and 0.39 diopters (D) regardless of the calculation formula and the method of measuring corneal curvature. Significant differences were observed in the APE from the four formulas and the two keratometric measurements (p = 0.014). In a total of 125 eyes from 125 patients, the mean APE was lowest with the Barrett Universal II formula. Across all formulas, both the mean APE and the median APE tended to be lower for K than for TK, although there was no significant difference. Approximately 70% to 80% of the patients were included within 0.5 D of the refractive error across all formulas. The percentage of eyes within 0.5 D of APE outcomes was not statistically different between the K and TK data when using each formula. CONCLUSIONS: Keratometric measurements considering the poster corneal curvature did not show any additional advantages when implanting the monofocal IOL with enhanced intermediate function during the FLACS.