Comparison of Six Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for a Trifocal Intraocular Lens
Qian Tan1, 3, Yong Wang1, 2
1 Aier School of Ophthalmology, Central South University, Changsha 410000, China 2 Wuhan Aier Eye Hospital, Wuhan 430000, China 3 Changsha Aier Eye Hospital, Changsha 410000, China
Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of the Barrett Universal II for calculating the power of atrifocal intraocular lens (IOL, AT LISA tri839 MP), and compare it with existing formulas (Haigis, HofferQ, SRK/T, SRK II and Holladay1). Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent phacoemulsification cataract surgery with implantation of a trifocal IOL at our institution from December 2016 to August 2018 were enrolled. Preoperative optical biometrics were measured by a Lenstar 900, and the Lenstar software was used to calculate the IOL power and predict the refractive outcome for every formula using User Group for Laser Interference Biometry (ULIB) constants. Subject manifest refraction was performed at 3 months or later postoperatively. The primary outcomes were the differences in mean absolute prediction error (MAE) between the formulas. Median and maximum absolute prediction errors (MedAE and MaxAE) were evaluated as well as the percentage of eyes within the prediction errors of ±0.5 D, ±1.0 D and ±2 D. A Kruskal-Wallis non-parameter test was used to analyze the data. Results: The study was comprised of 78 eyes of 55 patients. The formulas were ranked by the MAE as follows: Barrett Universal II (0.332 D), SRK/T (0.420 D), Haigis (0.480 D), Holladay1 (0.607 D), HofferQ (0.626 D) and SRKII (0.822 D). The differences in absolute errors with the formulas were significant (P<0.001). MaxAE of the Barrett Universal II was the lowest among all formulas. The highest percentage of eyes within the prediction errors of ±0.5 D, ±1.0 D and ±2.0 D was also obtained with the Barrett Universal II (73%, 94.8% and 100% respectively). Conclusions: The most accurate predictions of actual postoperative refraction areachieved using the Barrett Universal II, SRK/T and Haigis formulas. Thus, one of these formulas should be used for the IOL power calculation of atrifocal IOL.
谭倩1，3 王勇2，1. 六种人工晶状体计算公式预测三焦点人工晶状体屈光度准确性的比较[J]. 中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志, 2020, 22(2): 136-142.
Qian Tan1, 3, Yong Wang1, 2. Comparison of Six Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for a Trifocal Intraocular Lens. Chinese Journal of Optometry Ophthalmology and Visual science, 2020, 22(2): 136-142. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2020.02.010
Lee HK, Kim MK. Comparison of a new swept-source optical biometer with a partial coherence interferometry. BMC Ophthalmol, 2018, 18(1): 269-274. DOI: 10.1186/s12886-018-0936-6.
Yang Y, Lv H, Wang Y, et al. Clinical outcomes following trifocal diffractive intraocular lens implantation for age-related cataract in China. Clin Ophthalmol, 2018, 7(12): 1317-1324. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S169215.
Hoffer KJ, Aramberri J, Haigis W, et al. Protocols for studies of intraocular lens formula accuracy. Am J Ophthalmol, 2015, 160(3): 403-405. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2015.05.029.
[8]
Shajari M, Kolb CM, Petermann K, et al. Comparison of 9 modern intraocular lens power calculation formulas for a quadrifocal intraocular lens. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2018, 44(8): 942-948. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2018.05.021.
[9]
Kane JX, Van Heerden A, Atik A, et al. Intraocular lens power formula accuracy: Comparison of 7 formulas. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2016, 42(10): 1490-1500. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2016.07. 021.
[10]
Hoffer KJ, Savini G. IOL power calculation in short and long eyes. Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila), 2017, 6(4): 330-331. DOI: 10.22608/APO.2017338.
[11]
Gale RP, Saldana M, Johnston RL, et al. Benchmark standards for refractive outcomes after NHS cataract surgery. Eye (Lond), 2009, 23(1): 149-152. DOI: 10.1038/sj.eye.6702954.
[12]
Olsen T. Calculation of intraocular lens power: a review. Acta Ophthalmol Scand, 2007, 85(5): 472-485. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0420.2007.00879.x.
[13]
Haigis W, Lege B, Miller N, et al. Comparison of immersion ultrasound biometry and partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens calculation according to Haigis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol, 2000, 238(9): 765-773. DOI: 10.1007/s004170000188.
[14]
Abulafia A, Barrett GD, Rotenberg M, et al. Intraocular lens power calculation for eyes with an axial length greater than 26.0 mm: comparison of formulas and methods. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2015, 41(3): 548-556. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2014.06.033.
[15]
Barrett GD. An improved universal theoretical formula for intraocular lens power prediction. J Cataract Refract Surg, 1993, 19(6): 713-720. DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(13)80339-2.
[16]
Carifi G, Aiello F, Zygoura V, et al. Accuracy of the refractive prediction determined by multiple currently available intraocular lens power calculation formulas in small eyes. Am J Ophthalmol, 2015, 159(3): 577-583. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2014.11.036.
[17]
Chong EW, Mehta JS. High myopia and cataract surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol, 2016, 27(1): 45-50. DOI: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000217.
[18]
Hoffer KJ. The Hoffer Q formula: a comparison of theoretic and regression formulas. J Cataract Refract Surg, 1993, 19(6): 700-712. DOI: 10.1016/s0886-3350(13)80338-0.
[19]
Aristodemou P, Knox Cartwright NE, Sparrow JM, et al. Formula choice: Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, or SRK/T and refractive outcomes in 8 108 eyes after cataract surgery with biometry by partial coherence interferometry. J Cataract Refract Surg, 2011, 37(1): 63-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2010.07.032.
浙公网安备 33030202001892号