Angle Kappa and angle Alpha agreement between Pentacam Scheimpflug system, swept source optical coherence tomography and ray-tracing aberrometry.

PURPOSE: To compare the consistency of Pentacam Scheimpflug system (Pentacam® HR), ray-tracing aberrometry (iTrace), and swept source optical coherence tomography (IOLMaster 700) measurements for Angle Kappa and angle Alpha. METHODS: A prospective randomized cohort study. 86 individuals (86 eyes) aged 19-45 years with best corrected vision of 4.9 or better were randomly selected from January 2022 to December 2022 in a tertiary-level hospital. Angle Kappa and angle Alpha were measured or calculated using Pentacam, iTrace, and IOLMaster 700, respectively. RESULTS: The mean difference of angle Kappa between any two instruments was not statistically significant, but the mean difference of angle Alpha between both Pentacam and iTrace, Pentacam and IOLMaster 700, and iTrace and IOLMaster 700 was statistically significant (p value <0.001, 0.003, <0.001). The highest consistency of angle Kappa and the narrowest 95% LoA (-0.20 to 0.21) were found between Pentacam and iTrace according to Bland Altman plots, but between Pentacam and IOLMaster 700 according to Mountain plots. Both Bland Altman plots and Mountain plots showed the highest consistency of angle Alpha and the narrowest 95% LoA (-0.14 to 0.24) between Pentacam and iTrace. CONCLUSION: The mean angle Kappa among Pentacam® HR, iTrace, and IOLMaster 700 had good agreement, and the value of angle Kappa could be output directly, making it more convenient for clinical application. The measured or calculated angle Alpha had poor agreement, and ophthalmologists could refer to measurements from multiple instruments.

Outcomes of toric intraocular lens realignment surgery done using slit-lamp method and wavefront aberrometry method.

Purpose: To compare the slit-lamp method and wavefront aberrometry method based on outcomes of toric realignment surgeries. Settings: Tertiary care ophthalmic hospital. Design: Retrospective study. Methods: This study included all eyes undergoing toric intraocular lens (TIOL) realignment surgery between January 2019 and December 2021 for which TIOL axis assessment by slit-lamp method and wavefront aberrometry method was available. Data were retrieved from electronic medical records, and we documented demographics, uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), subjective refraction, and TIOL axis by slit-lamp and wavefront aberrometry methods on postoperative day 1 and day 14. In patients with misalignment, TIOL was realigned to the original position in group 1 (27 patients) and to an axis based on calculations provided by wavefront aberrometer in group 2 (25 patients). Post-realignment surgery, UCVA, subjective refraction, and TIOL axis by slit-lamp and wavefront aberrometry methods were assessed and analyzed. Results: We analyzed 52 eyes and found that the mean preoperative misalignment with the slit-lamp method (44.9° ±20.0°) and wavefront aberrometry (47.1° ±19.5°) was similar. The corresponding degrees of misalignment post-TIOL repositioning surgeries were 5.2° ±5.2° (slit-lamp method) and 4.7° ±5.1° (wavefront aberrometry) (P = 0.615). Both groups showed significant improvement in median log of minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) UCVA and reduction in median refractive cylinder. Conclusions: Slit-lamp method is as good as wavefront aberrometer method to assess TIOL axis. Toric realignment surgery is found to be safe, and realigning TIOL based on either slit-lamp method or wavefront aberrometer method equally improved UCVA and decreased residual refractive cylinder.

Influence of isofocal intraocular lenses on objective refraction based on autorefraction and aberrometry.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the objective refractions obtained by autorefraction and aberrometry under different lighting conditions with an isofocal intraocular lens (Isopure, BVI medical, Liége, Belgium) compared to a monofocal control lens (Micropure, BVI medical, Liége, Belgium) with the same platform and material. METHODS: Prospective, comparative and randomized study on patients undergoing cataract surgery and bilateral isofocal or monofocal IOL implantation. A total of 44 subjects were randomly assigned to either the isofocal group (n = 22) or the Micropure (n = 22). Manifest refraction (MR) was always performed under the same lighting conditions for all the patients. For objective refraction the autorefractor KR8800 and the aberrometer OPD-Scan III (Nidek Inc., Tokyo, Japan.) were used. For each eye included in the study, six result sets were collected: MR, AR (autorefraction measured with the autorefractor), WF-P and WF-M (Zernike-coefficients-based objective refraction, photopic and mesopic pupil size), OPD-C and OPD-M (autorefraction measured with the aberrometer in photopic and mesopic conditions). RESULTS: The mean sphere for MR was 0.03 ± 0.32D for the Isopure group and 0.24 ± 0.22D for the monofocal group (p = 0.013). For the Isopure group, Friedman analysis showed statistically significant differences for sphere measured with WF-P (p = 0.035), WF-M (p = 0.018) and OPD-M (p = 0.000), and SE measured with OPD-M (p = 0.004). In the Micropure lens group, the Friedman analysis showed differences for all values studied (p < 0.05). Correlation coefficients showed that AR is the objective method with the strongest correlation values for all components of refraction for both groups. CONCLUSION: The modification of the surfaces of the isofocal lens does not have a negative impact on the refraction obtained by AR compared to a standard monofocal intraocular lens.

Comparative evaluation of intraoperative aberrometry and Barrett's toric calculator in toric intraocular lens implantation.

Purpose: Barrett toric calculator (BTC) is known for its accuracy in toric IOL (tIOL) calculation over standard calculators; however, there is no study in literature to compare it with real-time intraoperative aberrometry (IA). The aim was to compare the accuracy of BTC and IA in predicting refractive outcomes in tIOL implantation. Methods: This was an institution-based prospective, observational study. Patients undergoing routine phacoemulsification with tIOL implantation were enrolled. Biometry was obtained from Lenstar-LS 900 and IOL power calculated using online BTC; however, IOL was implanted as per IA (Optiwave Refractive Analysis, ORA, Alcon) recommendation. Postoperative refractive astigmatism (RA) and spherical equivalent (SE) were recorded at one month, and respective prediction errors (PEs) were calculated using predicted refractive outcomes for both methods. The primary outcome measure was a comparison between mean PE with IA and BTC, and secondary outcome measures were uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCDVA), postoperative RA, and SE at one month. SPSS Version-21 was used; P < 0.05 considered significant. Results: Thirty eyes of 29 patients were included. Mean arithmetic and mean absolute PEs for RA were comparable between BTC (-0.70 ± 0.35D; 0.70 ± 0.34D) and IA (0.77 ± 0.32D; 0.80 ± 0.39D) (P = 0.09 and 0.09, respectively). Mean arithmetic PE for residual SE was significantly lower for BTC (-0.14 ± 0.32D) than IA (0.001 ± 0.33D) (-0.14 ± 0.32D; P = 0.002); however, there was no difference between respective mean absolute PEs (0.27 ± 0.21 D; 0.27 ± 0.18; P = 0.80). At one-month, mean UCDVA, RA, and SE were 0.09 ± 0.10D, -0.57 ± 0.26D, and -0.18 ± 0.27D, respectively. Conclusion: Both IA and BTC give reliable and comparable refractive results for tIOL implantation.

How Reliable Is Pyramidal Wavefront-Based Sensor Aberrometry in Measuring the In Vivo Optical Behaviour of Multifocal IOLs?

Cataract or refractive lens surgery, along with the implantation of multifocal intraocular lenses (MF-IOL), enables a complete range of functional far, near and intermediate vision. Refractive, diffractive and extended depth of focus (EDoF) or combination of these principles represent the technology used to obtain this multifocality. Aberrometry makes it possible to study the aberrations induced by MF-IOLs. Among the different optical principles available to measure ocular aberrations, pyramidal wavefront-based sensor (PWS) aberrometry shows the highest resolution with MF-IOLs. Retinal image quality measured by a PWS aberrometer differed significantly according to the technology of the implanted lens. Monofocal and diffractive lenses showed the highest values of far-distance retinal image quality, followed by refractive and EDoF lenses; however, retinal image quality analysed in diffractive lenses appears to be more dependent on residual refractive error. Considering this limitation, PWS-aberrometry could be used to compare diffractive lenses. Nevertheless, further studies are needed to provide additional information about the clinical retinal image quality of MF-IOLs and to help surgeons in the important preoperative selection of IOLs.

Intra-operative aberrometry versus conventional biometry for intraocular lens power calculation: A prospective observational study from a tertiary referral center.

Purpose: To evaluate the per operative intra-ocular lens (IOL) power calculation using intra-operative aberrometry (ORA) and its comparison with conventional methods. Methods: Patients with cataract planned for phacoemulsification by a single surgeon under topical anesthesia were enrolled in this prospective observational study in this prospective observational study. All patients underwent pre-operative biometry (Manual SRK-II and IOLMaster® 500) to determine the intra-ocular lens (IOL) power. Intra-operative aberrometry using ORA was also performed; however, IOL was inserted according to IOLMaster® (SRK/T). Spherical equivalent (SE) was recorded on post-operative days 1, 7, and 30. Patients were divided into three groups based on axial lengths for analysis. Comparative analysis was performed for the calculated IOL powers and prediction errors of ORA with conventional methods. Adjusted IOL power to calculate the emmetropic IOL using the LiHue formula was also determined and was compared with existing methods. A P-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 115 eyes from 113 patients were included, with a median age of 54.90 ± 14.3 years. The mean axial length was found to be 23.94 ± 2.3 mm. There was good agreement (87%) between ORA and IOLMaster® for calculated IOL powers with a mean difference of 0.047 ± 0.5D between the two (P = 0.33). A positive correlation was found between IOL power calculated using ORA, IOLMaster®, SRK-II, and adjusted IOL. Conclusion: The use of intra-operative aberrometry (ORA) to calculate IOL power in patients undergoing uncomplicated phacoemulsification is non-inferior relative to standard pre-operative measurement and planning.

Prediction accuracy of intraoperative aberrometry compared with preoperative biometry formulae for intraocular lens power selection.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of intraoperative wavefront aberrometry to preoperative biometry formulae for predicting intraocular lens power. DESIGN: Retrospective, consecutive case series. PARTICIPANTS: Eyes undergoing cataract extraction with at least 1 month of follow-up after surgery at an ambulatory surgical centre in Toronto. METHODS: Consecutive sample of 228 cataract extractions with monofocal, trifocal, or toric intraocular lens implantation from November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2019. The spherical equivalent was predicted preoperatively with Barrett Universal II, Hill-Radial Basis Function (RBF), SRK/T, Holladay I, Holladay II, Haigis, and HofferQ using biometry measurements and intraoperatively with wavefront aberrometry. The primary outcomes were mean prediction error and proportion of eyes with a spherical equivalent within 0.5 D of the refractive target at postoperative month 1. RESULTS: The analysis included 159 eyes with 52% females and a mean age of 69.4 years. Formulae with the lowest mean prediction error were Hill-RBF (0.32 D ± 0.02 D), Barrett Universal II (0.32 D ± 0.02 D), intraoperative aberrometry (0.32 D ± 0.02 D), SRK/T (0.33 D ± 0.02 D), Holladay II (0.34 D ± 0.03 D), Holladay I (0.35 D ± 0.02 D), Haigis (0.37 D ± 0.02 D), and HofferQ (0.42 D ± 0.02 D). There were no statistically significant differences between intraoperative aberrometry and the preoperative formulae. Formulae with the highest proportion of eyes within 0.5 D of the refractive target were intraoperative aberrometry (82%), Barrett Universal II (81%), Hill-RBF (80%), SRK/T (77%), Holladay II (76%), Holladay I (75%), Haigis (71%), and HofferQ (70%). CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative aberrometry and modern preoperative biometry formulae are equally effective at reaching the refractive target. In normal eyes, intraoperative aberrometry does not appear to provide any additional benefit to modern prediction formulae.

Best indices of dual Scheimpflug/Placido tomographer for keratoconus detection.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of different corneal parameters in detecting keratoconus using a dual Scheimpflug/Placido system (Sirius, CSO, Italy). METHODS: Sixty-eight eyes of 68 keratoconus patients and 77 eyes of 77 normal subjects were prospectively assessed in a diagnostic test study. The mean differences of the corneal parameters were compared using the independent t-test. The accuracy of curvature, elevation, pachymetry, and aberrometry indices, aqueous depth, and corneal volume in 10 mm was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC), and the DeLong method was used for the comparison of AUCs. Multiple tests in a parallel manner and multiple logistic regression analysis were applied to determine the best predictor indices. RESULTS: All indices except aqueous depth and corneal volume were significantly different between the two groups (P < 0.001). Back keratoconus vertex (KVb) and front Baiocchi-Calossi-Versaci index (BCVf) had the highest sensitivity (for both 98.53%) followed by front symmetry index (SIf) (96.12%) and thinnest point of the cornea (88.24%) in elevation, aberrometry, curvature, and pachymetry parameters, respectively. The highest diagnostic ability was observed in KVb (AUC 0.993) and BCVf index (AUC 0.992) (DeLong > 0.05). Multiple test analysis showed a combination of indices with the highest accuracy that was similar to the performance of each one individually, and keratoconus was diagnosed correctly in 98.5% of the cases (R2 = 93%). CONCLUSION: The parameters extracted from Sirius can differentiate keratoconus from normal corneas with high accuracy without the need for complex computational algorithms. Elevation-based and combined aberrometry indices had the highest diagnostic power.

Avaliação das aberrações de alta ordem em pacientes com ceratocone inicial / Assessment of high-order aberrations in patients with early keratoconus

RESUMO Objetivo Identificar alterações de aberrometria de alta ordem em diferentes graus de ceratocone. Métodos Estudo transversal, retrospectivo, observacional. Foram analisados 54 pacientes (108 olhos) diagnosticados com ceratocone pelo mesmo especialista em córnea por meio dos critérios ABCD de Belin/Ambrósio Enhanced Ectasia, utilizando-se o tomógrafo Pentacam® HR 70900 (Oculus Wetzlar, Alemanha). Além disso, foram feitas análises qualitativa e quantitativa das aberrações de alta ordem desses mesmos pacientes por meio do OPD-Scan III-NIDEK. Resultados Por meio da avaliação de ambos os olhos dos pacientes com os critérios de Belin-Ambrósio, constatou-se presença de ceratocone em 34 pacientes. Ademais, por meio da análise estatística, constatou-se relação direta entre a asfericidade posterior e o desenvolvimento do ceratocone, com p<0,001 (referência: p<0,05). Por meio da análise do OPD-Scan III-NIDEK, as principais aberrações de alta ordem encontradas nos pacientes com ceratocone foram coma, trefoil e aberração esférica. Conclusão O raio da curvatura posterior é a primeira variável a se alterar com o desenvolvimento do ceratocone, o que se faz perceptível na análise da asfericidade posterior por meio o Pentacam®. Além disso, a alteração da paquimetria e da asfericidade posterior influencia diretamente o desenvolvimento de aberrações de alta ordem em pacientes com ceratocone.

ABSTRACT Objective To identify higher order aberrometry changes in different degrees of keratoconus. Methods Cross-sectional, retrospective, observational study. Fifty-four patients (108 eyes) diagnosed with keratoconus by the same corneal specialist using the Belin/Ambrósio Enhanced Ectasia ABCD criteria were analyzed, using the Pentacam® HR 70900 tomograph (Oculus Wetzlar, Germany). In addition, qualitative and quantitative analysis of higher order aberrations in these patients was performed using the OPD-Scan III-NIDEK. Results Through the evaluation of both eyes of the patients according to the criteria of Benin Ambrósio, the presence of KCN was verified in 34 patients. Furthermore, through statistical analysis, a direct relationship was found between posterior asphericity and the development of KCN; p<0.001 (reference: p<0.05). Through the analysis of the OPD scan, the main higher order aberrations found in patients with KCN were Coma, Trefoil and Spherical Aberration (AE). Conclusion The posterior curvature radius is the first variable to change with the development of the KCN, which is noticeable in the analysis of posterior asphericity in Pentacam. In addition, alterations in pachymetry and posterior asphericity directly influence the development of higher order aberrations in patients with KCN.

Intraoperative aberrometry versus preoperative biometry for intraocular lens power selection in patients with axial hyperopia.

Purpose: This study was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of intraoperative aberrometry (IA) in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation and compare it with conventional IOL formulas. Methods: This was a prospective case series. Eyes with visually significant cataract and axial hyperopia (AL <22.0 mm) underwent IA-assisted phacoemulsification with posterior chamber IOL (Alcon AcrySof IQ). Postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) was compared with predicted SE to calculate the outcomes with different formulas (SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Haigis, Holladay 2, Barrett Universal Ⅱ and Hill-RBF). Accuracy of intraoperative aberrometer was compared with other formulas in terms of mean absolute prediction error (MAE), percentage of patients within 0.5 D and 1 D of their target, and percentage of patients going into hyperopic shift. Results: Sixty-five eyes (57 patients) were included. In terms of MAE, both Hoffer Q (MAE = 0.30) and IA (MAE = 0.32) were significantly better than Haigis, SRK/T, and Barrett Universal Ⅱ (P < 0.05). Outcomes within ±0.5 D of the target were maximum with Hoffer Q (80%), superior to IA (Hoffer Q > IA > Holladay 2 > Hill-RBF > Haigis > SRK/T > Barrett Universal Ⅱ). Hoffer Q resulted in minimum hyperopic shift (30.76%) followed by Hill-RBF (38.46%), Holladay 2 (38.46%), Haigis (43.07%), and then IA (46.15%), SRK/T (50.76%) and Barrett Universal Ⅱ (53.84%). Conclusion: IA was more effective (statistically significant) in predicting IOL power than Haigis, SRK/T, and Barrett Universal Ⅱ although it was equivalent to Hoffer Q. Hoffer Q was superior to all formulas in terms of percentage of patients within 0.5 D of their target refractions and percentage of patients going into hyperopic shift.

Validation of a simple-to-use, affordable, portable, wavefront aberrometry-based auto refractometer in the adult population: A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Refraction is one of the key components of a comprehensive eye examination. Auto refractometers that are reliable and affordable can be beneficial, especially in a low-resource community setting. The study aimed to validate the accuracy of a novel wave-front aberrometry-based auto refractometer, Instaref R20 against the open-field system and subjective refraction in an adult population. METHODS: All the participants underwent a comprehensive eye examination including objective refraction, subjective acceptance, anterior and posterior segment evaluation. Refraction was performed without cycloplegia using WAM5500 open-field auto refractometer (OFAR) and Instaref R20, the study device. Agreement between both methods was evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis. The repeatability of the device based on three measurements in a subgroup of 40 adults was assessed. RESULTS: The refractive error was measured in 132 participants (mean age,30.53 ± 9.36 years, 58.3% female). The paired mean difference of the refraction values of the study device against OFAR was - 0.13D for M, - 0.0002D (J0) and - 0.13D (J45) and against subjective refraction (SR) was - 0.09D (M), 0.06 (J0) and 0.03D (J45). The device agreed within +/- 0.50D of OFAR in 78% of eyes for M, 79% for J0 and 78% for J45. The device agreed within +/- 0.5D of SR values for M (84%), J0 (86%) and J45 (89%). CONCLUSION: This study found a good agreement between the measurements obtained with the portable autorefractor against open-field refractometer and SR values. It has a potential application in population-based community vision screening programs for refractive error correction without the need for highly trained personnel.

Influence of Ocular Surface Hydration on Intra-Operative Aberrometry Measurement and Toric Intraocular Lens Recommendation.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of intra-operative live refraction stability as a surrogate marker of ocular surface hydration on intra-operative aberrometry (IA) results and to quantify the minimum duration of stable refraction needed to achieve accurate intraocular lens (IOL) selection. Methods: In this nonrandomized consecutive retrospective chart review, 18,000 data points from 45 live refraction runs of 15 patients were digitized and analyzed. An objective automated moving average method of frames lengths of 88 ms, 110 ms, and 132 ms with less than 0.5 diopters (D) of fluctuation was compared to raw IA capture data. The difference-vector (DV) of the predicted toric powers was compared among these groups. Subjectively, traces were classified as stable or unstable if the live refraction fluctuated less than 0.5 D for 5 seconds. The DV based on the stable period was compared with the IA capture data. Results: The DVs for all frame intervals showed no significant difference when compared with IA readings. In 15 of 45 (33.3%) cases, IA active refraction traces were stable and the DV (0.27 D ± 0.15 D) was significantly less than unstable traces (0.49 D ± 0.28 D). IOL recommendations from 14 (93.3%) of stable runs led to a <0.5 D of postoperative cylinder compared to 14 (47.7%) in unstable runs. Conclusions: Intra-operative live refraction stability is affected by ocular hydration. Surgeons should look for periods of refractive stability for at least 5 seconds to better assess measurement quality. This can be facilitated by capturing and including the active refraction trace, which is currently unavailable for review. Translational Relevance: Graphing live refractive IA readings and determining refractive stability translates to more accurate IOL selection.

Ray-tracing Analysis of Accommodation and Pseudoaccommodation in Phakic and Pseudophakic Eyes.

PURPOSE: To compare objective measurements of accommodation and pseudoaccommodation in phakic and pseudo-phakic eyes using ray-tracing aberrometry. METHODS: Patients with normal and hyperprolate corneas (post-hyperopic laser in situ keratomileusis) who underwent cataract surgery from March 2018 to October 2019 at the Medical University of South Carolina were examined and received either a diffractive intraocular lens (IOL) with an echelette design (Tecnis ZXR00 Symfony; Johnson & Johnson Vision), a monofocal IOL with negative spherical aberration (Tecnis ZCB00; Johnson & Johnson Vision), or an aberration-free IOL (MX60E; Bausch & Lomb). The control groups consisted of young and presbyopic phakic patients. Ray-tracing wavefront analysis was performed 1 to 3 months postoperatively. Objective ray-tracing metrics of accommodation and pseudoaccommodation included the effective range of focus, sphere shift accommodation, and depth of focus. RESULTS: Sixty-two eyes received a Tecnis ZCB00, 39 a MX60E, and 43 a Tecnic ZXR00 Symfony IOL; furthermore, 20 young phakic eyes and 19 presbyopic eyes were included in this study. The effective range of focus and sphere shift accommodation in the young control group were statistically larger than in the presbyopic group (P = .005 and P < .001, respectively). There was no difference in effective range of focus, sphere shift accommodation, and pseudoaccommodations between the different IOL groups. The young control group had the highest visual Strehl optical transfer function for near and distant targets (0.64 ± 0.24 and 0.56 ± 0.19, respectively), whereas the aberration-free IOL in the MX60E hyperprolate cornea group presented the lowest visual Strehl optical transfer function value for near (0.49 ± 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: Ray-tracing aberrometry can objectively assess accommodative amplitude in phakic eyes and pseudoaccommodation (depth of focus) in pseudophakic eyes. [J Refract Surg. 2022;38(10):661-667.].

Wavefront aberrometry repeatability and agreement-A comparison between Pentacam AXL Wave, iTrace and OPD-Scan III.

INTRODUCTION: To compare intrasession agreement and repeatability of wavefront aberration measurements from three different aberrometers obtained using Hartmann-Shack, ray tracing and automated retinoscopy methods, as well as their interdevice agreement. METHODS: Three consecutive measurements were obtained using the Pentacam AXL Wave, the iTrace and the OPD-Scan III in 47 eyes of 47 patients. Wavefront refractions, root mean square of total aberrations (RMS total), RMS of higher-order aberrations (HOA) and second-, third- and fourth-order HOAs were exported for 4-mm pupils. Wavefront refractions were converted into vector components: M, J0 and J45 . Intrasession agreement and repeatability were evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and repeatability coefficients (RCs); interdevice agreement was assessed using the Bland-Altman method. RESULTS: The intrasession agreement and repeatability of RMS HOA were comparable between the three devices; both the Pentacam AXL Wave and the OPD-Scan III had better intrasession agreement and repeatability for the RMS total than the iTrace (p ≤ 0.02). Intrasession repeatability for the majority of second- and third-order aberrations was better on the Pentacam AXL Wave than on the iTrace (p ≤ 0.01) and OPD-Scan III (p ≤ 0.04), although their agreement and repeatability in spherical aberration were comparable (p ≥ 0.24). Significant systematic differences and proportional bias were detected for almost all refraction power vectors and Zernike coefficients among the three devices. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, all three devices provided good-to-excellent agreement for aberration measurements. Most of the individual Zernike's components were not exchangeable between different aberrometers. Their relative intrasession performance in agreement and repeatability varied significantly across different ocular aberration parameters.

Ocular Aberrations in Eyes with Primary Congenital Glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To highlight the magnitude of ocular higher order aberrations (HOA) and lower order aberrations (LOA), including component contributions from corneal and internal planes in Primary Congenital Glaucoma (PCG) patients. METHODS: Consecutive treated PCG patients co-operative for ocular examination and aberrometry, were enrolled over two years for this cross-sectional, comparative, single-center, unmasked study. Best-corrected visual acuity, refraction, IOP, wavefront aberrometry and topography (iTrace) were performed and results were compared with unaffected fellow eyes of unilateral glaucoma patients as well as age and sex-matched controls with no ocular anomalies other than treatable refractive error. RESULTS: Both eyes of 32 consecutive PCG patients (17 unilateral, 15 bilateral) and 39 controls were enrolled. The median LogMAR corrected distance visual acuity of PCG eyes was 0.68 (IQR: 0.2-1.8). Total ocular (Root mean square (RMS) 1.7 µm vs 0.3 µm, p = 0.014), corneal (RMS 1.1 µm vs 0.3 µm, p = 0.004) and internal (RMS 1.1 µm vs 0.2 µm, p = 0.013) aberrations, as well as HOAs and LOAs at each plane, were significantly higher in PCG eyes than in controls. Component HOAs from corneal and internal planes were positively correlated with each other (p < 0.001; rs: 0.7). Total aberrations were greater in the affected eyes of PCG compared to the rest. The predominant subtype of HOAs in PCG was coma and trefoil. PCG with corneal opacity/Haab's striae had significantly higher astigmatism than the affected eyes with clear corneae at the corneal plane (p = 0.02). The aberrations were not statistically associated with the corneal diameter or refractive error in PCG eyes. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly greater aberrations (Total, HOAs and LOAs, at corneal as well as an internal plane) were seen among eyes affected with PCG. Though the exact impact of these aberrations on the final visual outcome is difficult to determine, these could play a pertinent role in compromising visual function, thus impacting the management of visual rehabilitation in these patients.

The Use of Intraoperative Aberrometry in Normal Eyes: An Analysis of Intraocular Lens Selection in Scenarios of Disagreement.

PURPOSE: To compare prediction error outcomes between the Optiwave Refractive Analysis System (ORA) (Alcon Laboratories, Inc) and two modern intraocular lens (IOL) formulas (Hill-RBF2.0 [HRBF] and Barrett Universal II [BUII]), and further analyze IOL selection in scenarios of disagreement between methods. METHODS: Patients with no previous history of corneal refractive surgery who underwent cataract extraction and had intraoperative aberrometry measurements between October 2016 and December 2019 were analyzed. The prediction error for the ORA, HRBF, and BUII were calculated based on the postoperative manifest refraction. Further analysis was performed evaluating prediction error for scenarios of disagreement between the three methods. RESULTS: After exclusions, 281 eyes were included. The mean absolute prediction errors were 0.28 diopters (D) (ORA), 0.31 D (HRBF), and 0.33 D (BUII) (P < .05). In instances when the IOL recommended by the ORA was in disagreement with what was selected preoperatively, there was no benefit when the lens recommended by the ORA was selected based on anecdotal experience. When further analyzing these instances of disagreement, selecting the ORA-recommended lens when it is higher in power results in improved refractive outcomes: the ORA resulted in more eyes within ±0.25 diopters (D) of predicted spherical error (65% ORA, 37% HRBF, 32% BUII; P = .004) and fewer hyperopic surprises (5% ORA, 15% HRBF, 24% BUII; P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: In normal eyes without previous corneal refractive surgery, intraoperative aberrometry is not different from to two modern preoperative IOL formulas. Placing the ORA-recommended lens when it is higher in power than that selected preoperatively results in better refractive outcomes. [J Refract Surg. 2022;38(5):304-309.].