Development and validation of a novel vault prediction formula based on structural parameters of the anterior and posterior chambers.

BACKGROUND: Accurate prediction of postoperative vault in implantable collamer lens (ICL) implantation is crucial; however, current formulas often fail to account for individual anatomical variations, leading to suboptimal visual outcomes and necessitating improved predictive models. We aimed to verify the prediction accuracy of our new predictive model for vaulting based on anterior and posterior chamber structural parameters. METHODS: This retrospective observational study included 137 patients (240 eyes) who previously underwent ICL surgery. Patients were randomly divided into the model establishment (192 eyes) or validation (48 eyes) groups. Preoperative measurements of the anterior and posterior chamber structures were obtained using Pentacam, CASIA2 anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT), ultrasound biomicroscopy, and other devices. Stepwise multiple linear regression analysis was used to evaluate the relationship between the vault and each variable (WL formula). The Friedman test was performed for the vaulting prediction results of the WL, NK (Ver. 3), and KS formulas (Ver. 4) in CASIA2 AS-OCT, as well as the Zhu formula and vault measurements. The proportions of prediction error within ± 250 µm per formula were compared. RESULTS: The predicted vault values of the WL, NK, KS, and Zhu formulas and vault measurements were 668.74 ± 162.12, 650.85 ± 248.47, 546.56 ± 128.99, 486.56 ± 210.76, and 716.06 ± 233.84 µm, respectively, with a significant difference (χ2 = 69.883, P = 0.000). Significant differences were also found between the measured vault value and Zhu formula, measured vault value and KS formula, WL formula and Zhu formula, WL formula and KS formula, NK formula and KS formula, and NK formula and Zhu formula (P < 0.001) but not between other groups. The proportions of prediction error within ± 250 µm per formula were as follows: WL formula (81.3%) > NK formula (70.8%) > KS formula (66.7%) > Zhu formula (54.2%). CONCLUSIONS: The WL formula, which considers the complexity of the anterior and posterior chamber structures, demonstrates greater calculation accuracy, compared with the KS (Ver. 4) and Zhu formulas. The proportion of absolute prediction error ≤ 250 µm is higher with the WL formula than with the NK formula (ver. 3). This enhanced predictive capability can improve ICL sizing decisions, thereby increasing the safety and efficacy of ICL implantation surgeries.

Accuracy of 12 Intraocular Lens Power Formulas After Corneal Myopic Refractive Surgery.

PURPOSE: To assess the predictive accuracy of new-generation online intraocular lens (IOL) power formulas in eyes with previous myopic laser refractive surgery (LRS) and to evaluate the influence of corneal asphericity on the predictive accuracy. METHODS: The authors retrospectively evaluated 52 patients (78 eyes) with a history of laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) or photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) who subsequently underwent cataract surgery. Refractive prediction errors were calculated for 12 no-history new online formulas: 8 formulas with post-LRS versions (Barrett True-K, EVO 2.0, Hoffer QST, and Pearl DGS) using keratometry and posterior/total keratometry measured by IOLMaster 700 and 4 formulas without post-LRS versions (Cooke K6 and Kane) using keratometry and total keratometry. The refractive prediction error, mean absolute error (MAE), and percentages of eyes with prediction errors of ±0.25, ±0.50, ±0.75, ±1.00, and ±1.50 diopters (D) were compared. RESULTS: The MAEs of the 12 formulas were significantly different (F = 83.66, P < .001). The MAEs ranged from 0.62 to 0.94 D and from 1.07 to 1.84 D in the formulas with and without post-LRS versions, respectively. The EVO formula produced the lowest MAE (0.60) and MedAE (0.47), followed by the Barrett True-K (0.69 and 0.50, respectively). Each percentage of eyes with refractive prediction error was also significantly different among the 12 formulas (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The EVO and Barrett True-K formulas demonstrate comparable performance to the other existing formulas in eyes with a history of myopic LASIK/PRK. Surgeons should use these formulas with post-LRS versions and input keratometric values whenever possible. [J Refract Surg. 2024;40(6):e354-e361.].