Comparison of 13 formulas for IOL power calculation with measurements from partial coherence interferometry

Author:

Savini GiacomoORCID,Di Maita Marco,Hoffer Kenneth JORCID,Næser KristianORCID,Schiano-Lomoriello Domenico,Vagge AldoORCID,Di Cello Luca,Traverso Carlo E

Abstract

Background/aims To compare the accuracy of 13 formulas for intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in cataract surgery. Methods In this retrospective interventional case series, optical biometry measurements were entered into these formulas: Barrett Universal II (BUII) with and without anterior chamber depth (ACD) as a predictor, EVO 2.0 with and without ACD as a predictor, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Holladay 2AL, Kane, Næser 2, Pearl-DGS, RBF 2.0, SRK/T, T2 and VRF. The mean prediction error (PE), median absolute error (MedAE), mean absolute error and percentage of eyes with a PE within ±0.25, ±0.50, ±0.75 and ±1.00 diopters (D) were calculated. Results Two hundred consecutive eyes were enrolled. With all formulas, the mean PE was zero. The BUII with no ACD had the lowest standard deviation (±0.343 D), followed by the T2 (0.347 D), Kane (0.348 D), EVO 2.0 with no ACD (0.348 D) and BUII with ACD (0.353 D) formulas. The difference among the MedAEs of all formulas was statistically significant (p<0.0001); the lowest values were achieved with the Kane (0.214 D), RBF 2.0 (0.215 D), BUII with and without ACD (0.218 D) and SRK/T (0.223 D). A percentage ranging from 80% to 88.5% of eyes showed a PE within ±0.50 D and all formulas achieved more than 50% of eyes with a PE within ±0.25 D. Conclusion All investigated formulas achieved good results; there was a tendency towards better outcomes with newer formulas. Traditional formulas can still be considered an accurate option.

Funder

Ministero della Salute

Fondazione Roma

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience,Sensory Systems,Ophthalmology

Reference28 articles.

1. Comparison of 9 intraocular lens power calculation formulas

2. Intraocular lens power formula accuracy: Comparison of 7 formulas

3. Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Calculation Formulas

4. Accuracy of optical biometry combined with Placido disc corneal topography for intraocular lens power calculation;Savini;PLoS One,2017

5. Comparison of formula accuracy for intraocular lens power calculation based on measurements by a swept-source optical coherence tomography optical biometer;Savini;J Cataract Refract Surg,2020

Cited by 49 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3