ABSTRACT
@#AIM: To compare the accuracy of Barrett Universal Ⅱ, Haigis and modified Wang-Koch SRK/T formulas in calculating intraocular lens(IOL)power in eyes with long axial length(AL).<p>METHODS: Eyes were divided into three AL groups as follows: 26.0 to 28.0mm(group A), 28.0 to 30.0mm(group B), and 30.0mm or more(group C). All eyes underwent phacoemulsification cataract surgery. In the 3mo after operation, IOL powers that would have resulted in emmetropia were calculated according to results of subjective refraction. The predictive error(PE)and absolute error(AE)of each formulas were calculated and compared and the factors(AL, keratometry value, the anterior chamber depth)associated with PEs were analyzed.<p>RESULTS: The average PE of Barrett Universal Ⅱ, Haigis and modified Wang-Koch SRK/T formulas were 0.37±0.78D, 0.77±0.88D and 0.36±0.82D respectively. In groups A and B, the PEs and AEs of three formulas were not statistically significant(<i>P</i>>0.05). However, in group C, the PEs and AEs of Barrett Universal Ⅱ and modified Wang-Koch SRK/T formula were significantly less than Haigis formula(<i>P</i><0.05). The PEs of Haigis formula in cataract eyes with long AL was affected by AL and keratometry value, whereas the PEs of Barrett Universal Ⅱ and modified Wang-Koch SRK/T formula was not affected by AL.<p>CONCLUSION: In eyes with an AL of 26.0 to 30.0mm, all three formulas are acceptable. In eyes with AL of 30.0mm or more, the accuracy of Barrett Universal Ⅱ and modified Wang-Koch SRK/T formula are better than Haigis formula.
ABSTRACT
Background: The aim and objective of the study was to calculate intraocular lens power with IOL master in 100 eyes of 100 patients with long axial lengths between 25mm to 32mm.To analyse and compare the results of various formulae by postoperative auto refractometry and corrected distance visual acuity and to know the most accurate formula for highly myopic eyes (Axial length more than 25.00 mm). Methods: Patients coming to Sarojini Devi Eye Hospital from December 2012-September 2014 for cataract surgery were considered in this study. All patients with visually significant cataract having fundus findings within normal limits were included in this study and patients of complicated cataract due to trauma, uveitis, Glaucoma and any corneal pathology were excluded from the study. Results: The Mean AL was 27.25 ± 1.25 mm, the Mean keratometric value was 43.62 ± 1.45 D, and the Mean Absolute Error (MAE) calculated by the Haigis was 0.07 DD. Compared to the MAEs generated by the other formulae, the MAE generated by the Haigis was comparable to that by the SRK/T (0.231 D), and significantly lower than those by the Hoffer Q (0.481 D) and Holladay (0.864 D). Conclusions: The Mean post-operative refractive error (spherical equivalent) was found to be the least with Haigis formula followed by SRK/T for eyes with long axial length. The HAIGIS formula has a better predictability and accuracy. The postoperative hyperopic shift was comparable between HAIGIS and SRK-T formulae the least postoperative hyperopic shift with Haigis formula compared to other formulae.
ABSTRACT
Objective The difference of the equivalent IOL powers before and after LASIK was calculated by using the Haigis-L formula and Sirius ray-tracing respectively.And study the correlation be-tween the intraocular lens power and the myopic before laser in situ keratomileusis.Methods Ninety-one patients undergoing myopic laser in situ keratomileusis were enrolled, they were divided into 3 groups ac-cording to myopic diopter, group I (-1.00D~-3.00D) 13cases, group II( -3.25D and -6.00D)60 cases, group III(-6.25D~-10.0D)18 cases.The equivalent IOL power before and after LASIK will be calculated using Haigis-L formula and Sirius ray-tracing.The data were analyzed using SPSS20.0.Results 80.2%of the cases calculated using Haigis-L formula were within ±0.50D of the predicted refraction , 94.5%were within ±1.00D, and 100%within ±1.50D.also, within ±0.50D of the predicted refrac-tion 13cases(100%),51cases(85%),9cases(50%) in group I, II, III respectively.74.7% of the eyes calculated using Sirius ray-tracing were within ±0.50D of the predicted refraction , 89.0%were within ± 1.00D, and 100%within ±1.50D.within ±0.50D of the predicted refraction 12cases(92.3%),48cases (80%),8cases(44.4%) in group I, II, III respectively.Conclusions Sirius ray-tracing and Haigis-L formula can calculate IOL power accurately in eyes with prior myopic LASIK, with no need for preoperative data.and there is positive correlation between the intraocular lens power aberration and the myopic diopter before LASIK.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To investigate the accuracy of the Haigis formula compared to other formulas using contact ultrasound biometry. METHODS: This study was performed on 94 patients (114 eyes) who underwent cataract surgery in our hospital. Axial length (AXL) and anterior chamber depth (ACD) were measured using both A-scan and intraocular lens (IOL) Master(R). Patients were divided into three groups based on AXL; Group I (AXL or = 25.5 mm). Before cataract surgery, predicted refraction was calculated using the Haigis, SRK/T, Hoffer Q, and Holladay 1 formulas using both A-scan and IOL Master(R) measurements. Mean absolute error (MAE) were analyzed at one month after surgery using the various IOL formulas. RESULTS: Using contact ultrasound biometry, in Group I, MAE of Haigis was 0.80 +/- 0.67 D and was significantly lower than that using SRK/T. In Group II, the Haigis MAE was 0.72 +/- 0.55 D and was significantly lower than the results of all other formulas. In Group III, the Haigis MAE was 0.76 +/- 1.13 D and not significantly different from the results of other formulas. Comparing MAE of A-scan to IOL Master(R), the Haigis formula showed 0.16 D higher error that decreased when the AXL was close to the normal range. CONCLUSIONS: Using contact ultrasound biometry, the Haigis formula provided the best predictability of postoperative refractive outcome compared to other formulas in eyes with normal axial length.
Subject(s)
Humans , Anterior Chamber , Biometry , Cataract , Lenses, Intraocular , Reference Values , UltrasonographyABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To investigate the accuracy of the Haigis formula compared to other formulas using contact ultrasound biometry. METHODS: This study was performed on 94 patients (114 eyes) who underwent cataract surgery in our hospital. Axial length (AXL) and anterior chamber depth (ACD) were measured using both A-scan and intraocular lens (IOL) Master(R). Patients were divided into three groups based on AXL; Group I (AXL or = 25.5 mm). Before cataract surgery, predicted refraction was calculated using the Haigis, SRK/T, Hoffer Q, and Holladay 1 formulas using both A-scan and IOL Master(R) measurements. Mean absolute error (MAE) were analyzed at one month after surgery using the various IOL formulas. RESULTS: Using contact ultrasound biometry, in Group I, MAE of Haigis was 0.80 +/- 0.67 D and was significantly lower than that using SRK/T. In Group II, the Haigis MAE was 0.72 +/- 0.55 D and was significantly lower than the results of all other formulas. In Group III, the Haigis MAE was 0.76 +/- 1.13 D and not significantly different from the results of other formulas. Comparing MAE of A-scan to IOL Master(R), the Haigis formula showed 0.16 D higher error that decreased when the AXL was close to the normal range. CONCLUSIONS: Using contact ultrasound biometry, the Haigis formula provided the best predictability of postoperative refractive outcome compared to other formulas in eyes with normal axial length.
Subject(s)
Humans , Anterior Chamber , Biometry , Cataract , Lenses, Intraocular , Reference Values , UltrasonographyABSTRACT
Objetivo: Describir los resultados de la cirugía de catarata en pacientes vitrectomizados con aceite de silicona. Métodos: Se realizó un estudio descriptivo y prospectivo en 50 ojos de 49 pacientes vitrectomizados con aceite de silicona que necesitaron cirugía de catarata, en el Instituto Cubano de Oftalmología "Ramón Pando Ferrer" de septiembre de 2008 a noviembre de 2009. Se analizó el componente esférico esperado y obtenido (con aceite de silicona y sin este), las diferencias queratométricas, el astigmatismo resultante, los cambios morfológicos y morfométricos del endotelio corneal, la mejor agudeza visual sin corrección y corregida y las complicaciones intraoperatorias y posoperatorias. Los resultados se expresaron en frecuencias absolutas y relativas, media aritmética y desviación estándar. Resultados: Predominó el sexo masculino entre 51 y 60 años de edad. El aceite de silicona produjo una hipercorrección en el componente esférico obtenido promedio de 4,08 dioptrías que disminuyó hasta rangos de emetropía esperada cuando se extrajo. No hubo diferencias queratométricas posoperatorias significativas y el astigmatismo resultante fue mínimo (0,31 dioptrías). La mejor agudeza visual sin corrección y con esta, mejoró después de la cirugía. Hubo una pérdida mínima de células endoteliales (6,4 %) y la variabilidad del pleomorfismo y polimegatismo estuvo dentro de los rangos clasificados en el preoperatorio. La opacidad de la cápsula posterior (62 %) fue la complicación más frecuente. Conclusiones: La biometría óptica coherente y las fórmulas de cuarta generación permiten obtener una buena predictibilidad en el cálculo del lente intraocular en casos especiales como los vitrectomizados con aceite de silicona.
Objective: To describe the results of cataract surgery results in patients who had undergone vitrectomy with silicone oil. Methods: A prospective and descriptive study was performed in 50 eyes from 49 patients who had previously undergone vitrectomy with silicone oil, and later had required cataract surgery at Ramón Pando Ferrer, Cuban Institute of Ophthalmology from September 2008 to November 2009. Several variables were analyzed such as the expected and obtained spherical component with and without silicone oil, the keratometric differences and the resulting astigmatism, the morphological and morphometric changes in the corneal endothelium, the best uncorrected and corrected visual acuity and transoperative and postoperative complications. The results were provided in absolute and relative frequencies, arithmetic means and standard deviation. Results: : The male group predominated as well as the 51 - 60y age group. The silicone oil caused hypercorrection in average spherical component of 4.08 D, which was reduced to the expected emmetropia ranges when the silicone oil was removed. There were no significant postoperative differences in keratometry and the resultant astigmatism was minimal (O.31 D). All the patients improved their best uncorrected and corrected visual acuity after surgery. There was minimal loss of endothelial cells (6.4 %) and the variability of pleomorphism and polymegatism remained within the preoperative classified range. The posterior capsule opacity was the most common complication (62 %). Conclusion: Optical coherence biometry and fourth-generation formulas allow obtaining good predictability in the calculation of intraocular lens in special cases such as the ones that undergo vitrectomy with silicon oil.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of axial length (AXL) and anterior chamber depth (ACD) on the accuracy of the Haigis formula in comparison to its effect on other 3rd generation IOL power calculations. The possibility of measurement error in ACD using either method was also investigated. METHODS: A study was performed on 137 eyes of 98 patients who underwent cataract surgery in our hospital. AXL and ACD were measured using IOL Master, and IOL power was calculated using the Haigis, SRK/T, Hoffer Q, and Holladay 1 formulas. ACD was also measured using Pentacam. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on ACD and AXL. Mean numeric error and mean absolute error were analyzed 1 month after surgery. RESULTS: Five formulae showed no significant difference in refractive error in the 3 groups based on AXL. In contrast, the Haigis formula showed statistically significant differences in the group with shallow ACD, in which hyperopic shift was also demonstrated. The difference in ACD between using IOL Master and using Pentacam was significant in the shallow ACD group, with IOL Master showing more shallow measurement. However, the other groups based on ACD showed no significant difference in the refractive error from the Haigis formula, and in the difference in ACD between measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Errors in ACD measurement should be taken into consideration for discrepancy between the Haigis formula measurement and other formula measurements. The authors of the present study suggest that ACD-driven refractive error should be considered in determination of IOL.
Subject(s)
Humans , Anterior Chamber , Cataract , Eye , Refractive ErrorsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the Haigis-L method of IOL Master that does not require preoperative data for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations and compare the results with other methods requiring preoperative data. METHODS: Fifty eyes of 25 patients who had undergone laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) and were followed for 1 month or longer were selected for this study. IOL power was calculated by four different methods: clinical history method, Feiz-Mannis method, modified Masket method, and Haigis-L method. RESULTS: The mean calculated IOL powers showed the following results: clinical history method; 23.65D, Feiz-Mannis method; 24.45D, modified Masket method; 22.89D, and Haigis-L method; 23.80D. Each IOL power differed statistically from others (p=0.000). The difference between each method was analyzed by the Bonferroni test, with the Feiz-Mannis method showing the highest result and the modified Masket method, the lowest. The clinical history method and Haigis-L method presented similar results. CONCLUSIONS: For patients without data prior to corneal refractive surgery, the Haigis-L method is as accurate as the clinical history method. Therefore, comparatively accurate results can be produced in IOL power calculations using the Haigis-L method after corneal refractive surgery.