• Int Ophthalmol · Dec 2021

    A comparative analysis of 12 intraocular lens power formulas.

    • Austin Pereira, Marko M Popovic, Yusuf Ahmed, John C Lloyd, Sherif El-Defrawy, John Gorfinkel, and Matthew B Schlenker.
    • Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, 340 College Street Unit 400, Toronto, ON, M5T 3A9, Canada.
    • Int Ophthalmol. 2021 Dec 1; 41 (12): 4137-4150.

    PurposeTo evaluate the accuracy of 12 intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations: Barrett Universal II, EVO, Haigis, Hill-RBF version 2.0, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Kane, Olsen, SRK/T, Super Formula and T2.MethodsIn this retrospective consecutive case series, cataract extraction and IOL implantation cases in Toronto, Canada, were recruited between 2017 and 2019. Refractive predictions were compared to the observed 1-month postoperative spherical equivalent to determine the refractive error for each formula cohort. Subgroup analysis stratified eyes into short (≤ 22.5 mm)-, intermediate (22.5 mm-25.5 mm)- and long (≥ 25.5 mm)-axial length (AL) cohorts. The primary outcome was the percentage of cases within ± 0.50D of refractive error.ResultsOverall, 764 cataract cases were analyzed. Formulas with the highest percentage of eyes within ± 0.50D of refractive error, in decreasing order, were: Kane (77.7%), Barrett Universal II (77.4%), EVO (76.6%), T2 (76.4%), Super (75.9%), Holladay 1 (75.4%), Hill-RBF 2.0 (74.7%), SRK/T (72.6%), Hoffer Q (72.5%), Haigis (71.7%), Olsen (67.4%) and Holladay 2 (67.3%). For short-AL eyes, the Holladay 1 formula was most accurate (n = 69, 78.3% within ± 0.50D), and for long-AL eyes, the Barrett Universal II formula was most accurate (n = 116, 76.7% within ± 0.50D). Kane, Barrett, EVO, T2 and Super formulas led to a significantly lower mean absolute error compared to the open-source calculations with optimized lens constants (p-value: < 0.001-0.042).ConclusionsThe Kane formula was the most accurate formula for the overall analysis. The Holladay 1 calculation was most accurate for short-AL cases, whereas the Barrett Universal II was superior for long-AL eyes.© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.