Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Accuracy of intraocular lens power formulas in patients with average keratometry greater than 46 diopters.
Rodríguez Ortiz, H; Flores Ortiz, L; Devereux García, R; Palacio Pastrana, C; Hilario Pérez, M; Villanueva Pérez, G; Piña Valdez, J M; Montalvo Domínguez, G Y; Gutierrez Díaz, L P.
Affiliation
  • Rodríguez Ortiz H; Fellow de Ecografía, Clínica Oftalmológica Salauno, Mexico City, Mexico. Electronic address: hilda.d3093@gmail.com.
  • Flores Ortiz L; Adscrita de Segmento Anterior, Clínica Oftalmológica Salauno, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • Devereux García R; Adscrito del Servicio de Ecografía, Clínica Oftalmológica Salauno, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • Palacio Pastrana C; Jefa de Enseñanza e Investigación, Clínica Oftalmológica Salauno, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • Hilario Pérez M; Adscrito del Servicio de Ecografía, Clínica Oftalmológica Salauno, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • Villanueva Pérez G; Adscrito del Servicio de Ecografía, Clínica Oftalmológica Salauno, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • Piña Valdez JM; Adscrito del Servicio de Ecografía, Clínica Oftalmológica Salauno, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • Montalvo Domínguez GY; Adscrito del Servicio de Ecografía, Clínica Oftalmológica Salauno, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • Gutierrez Díaz LP; Adscrito del Servicio de Ecografía, Clínica Oftalmológica Salauno, Mexico City, Mexico.
Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol (Engl Ed) ; 99(10): 413-419, 2024 Oct.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39025231
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To compare the accuracy of Kane, Barrett Universal II, Haigis, and SRK-T formulas in eyes with average keratometry greater than 46 diopters (D).

METHODS:

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 101 eyes of 101 patients with average keratometry greater than 46 D. The absolute prediction error (EA) was obtained for each patient one month after surgery. The mean absolute prediction error (MEA), median absolute prediction error (MedEA) and the percentage of patients with absolute refractive error less than 0.25 D, 0.50 D, and 1.00 D were calculated for each formula analyzed.

RESULTS:

The Kane formula achieved the lowest MEA (0.53 ± 0.43) and the lowest MedEA (0.41), followed by Barrett Universal II (MEA 0.56 ± 0.42, MedEA 0.49), SRK-T (MEA 0.59 ± 0.44, MedEA 0.54), and Haigis (MEA 0.77 ± 0.47, MedEA 0.69), showing a significant difference in the results. It was also observed that the Kane formula was the most accurate, with the highest percentage of patients, with EA less than 0.25 D, 0.50 D, and 1.00 D (30.7%, 54.4%, and 86.1%, respectively), while the Haigis formula was the least accurate (12.9%, 33.7%, and 69.3%, respectively).

CONCLUSION:

In eyes with corneas having average keratometry greater than 46 D, the Kane formula proves to be a useful tool in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation and demonstrates higher precision compared to the Barrett Universal II, SRK-T, and Haigis formulas.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Lenses, Intraocular Limits: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol (Engl Ed) Year: 2024 Document type: Article Country of publication: Spain

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Lenses, Intraocular Limits: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol (Engl Ed) Year: 2024 Document type: Article Country of publication: Spain