Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Intraocular lens power calculation formula accuracy: Comparison of 12 formulas for a trifocal hydrophilic intraocular lens.
Rocha-de-Lossada, Carlos; Colmenero-Reina, Elvira; Flikier, David; Castro-Alonso, Francisco-Javier; Rodriguez-Raton, Alvaro; García-Madrona, Jose-Luis; Peraza-Nieves, Jorge; Sánchez-González, José-María.
Afiliação
  • Rocha-de-Lossada C; Department of Ophthalmology, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona Institut Clinic d'Oftalmologia, Barcelona, Spain.
  • Colmenero-Reina E; Department of Ophthalmology, Hospital Costal del Sol, Málaga, Spain.
  • Flikier D; Department of Ophthalmology, University of Málaga, Málaga, Spain.
  • Castro-Alonso FJ; Department of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Vistalaser Clinic, Málaga, Spain.
  • Rodriguez-Raton A; Instituto de Cirugía Ocular, San José, Costa Rica.
  • García-Madrona JL; Department of Ophthalmology, Alcañiz Hospital, Teruel, Spain.
  • Peraza-Nieves J; Department on Anterior Segment Surgery, Instituto Oftalmológico Rodríguez-Ratón, Bilbao, Spain.
  • Sánchez-González JM; Department of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Vistalaser Clinic, Málaga, Spain.
Eur J Ophthalmol ; 31(6): 2981-2988, 2021 Nov.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33339479
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

To evaluate the accuracy of 12 intraocular lens (IOL) power formulas; Barrett Universal II, Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO), Haigis, Hill-Radial Basis Function (RBF), Hoffer Q, Holladay I, Kane, Ladas Super Formula, Olsen Lenstar, Panacea, Pearl-DGS, Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraff/theoretical (SRK/T). In addition, an analysis of the efficacy as a function of the axial length was performed.

METHODS:

About 171 from 93 patients 68 male eyes and 103 female eyes. Twelve IOL power formula calculations were studied with one IOL platform (trifocal hydrophilic IOL, FineVision Micro F), one biometer (Lenstar LS 900), one topographer (CSO Sirius Topographer), one surgeon, and one optometrist. Optimization were determined to be zeroed mean refractive prediction error. Mean error (ME), mean absolute error (MAE), median absolute error (MedAE) and refractive accuracy within ±1.00 D was calculated. Axial length was split in short and medium eyes.

RESULTS:

One hundred and seventy eyes were included. Formulas were ranked by percentage within ±0.50 diopters and MAE (D). Among all eyes, Olsen 86.55% (0.273 D) and Barrett Universal II 86.55% (0.285D). For short eyes (<22.5 mm), Olsen 90.70% (0.273 D) and Kane 90.70% (0.225 D). For medium eyes, Barrett 89.34% (0.237 D) and Pearl 86.89% (0.263 D).

CONCLUSION:

Olsen and Barrett formula obtained excellent accuracy for overall eyes. Kane and Olsen formula obtained the best results in short eyes. For medium axial length Barrett formula achieved the best accuracy results.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Facoemulsificação / Lentes Intraoculares Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Facoemulsificação / Lentes Intraoculares Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article