Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Highly Myopic Eyes
Purpose. To evaluate and compare the accuracy of different intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas for eyes with an axial length (AL) greater than 26.00 mm. Methods. This study reviewed 407 eyes of 219 patients with AL longer than 26.0 mm. The refractive prediction errors of IOL power calc...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2016-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Ophthalmology |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/1917268 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832545353741631488 |
|---|---|
| author | Yichi Zhang Xiao Ying Liang Shu Liu Jacky W. Y. Lee Srinivasan Bhaskar Dennis S. C. Lam |
| author_facet | Yichi Zhang Xiao Ying Liang Shu Liu Jacky W. Y. Lee Srinivasan Bhaskar Dennis S. C. Lam |
| author_sort | Yichi Zhang |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Purpose. To evaluate and compare the accuracy of different intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas for eyes with an axial length (AL) greater than 26.00 mm. Methods. This study reviewed 407 eyes of 219 patients with AL longer than 26.0 mm. The refractive prediction errors of IOL power calculation formulas (SRK/T, Haigis, Holladay, Hoffer Q, and Barrett Universal II) using User Group for Laser Interference Biometry (ULIB) constants were evaluated and compared. Results. One hundred seventy-one eyes were enrolled. The Barrett Universal II formula had the lowest mean absolute error (MAE) and SRK/T and Haigis had similar MAE, and the statistical highest MAE were seen with the Holladay and Hoffer Q formulas. The interquartile range of the Barrett Universal II formula was also the lowest among all the formulas. The Barrett Universal II formulas yielded the highest percentage of eyes within ±1.0 D and ±0.5 D of the target refraction in this study (97.24% and 79.56%, resp.). Conclusions. Barrett Universal II formula produced the lowest predictive error and the least variable predictive error compared with the SRK/T, Haigis, Holladay, and Hoffer Q formulas. For high myopic eyes, the Barrett Universal II formula may be a more suitable choice. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-1e95c17553284990ba763edf4f8b200b |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2090-004X 2090-0058 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2016-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Ophthalmology |
| spelling | doaj-art-1e95c17553284990ba763edf4f8b200b2025-02-03T07:25:59ZengWileyJournal of Ophthalmology2090-004X2090-00582016-01-01201610.1155/2016/19172681917268Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Highly Myopic EyesYichi Zhang0Xiao Ying Liang1Shu Liu2Jacky W. Y. Lee3Srinivasan Bhaskar4Dennis S. C. Lam5State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, ChinaDennis Lam & Partners Eye Center, Suite 1515, Central Building, 1-3 Peddler Street, Central, Hong KongC-MER (Shenzhen) Dennis Lam Eye Hospital, Shenzhen 518000, ChinaDennis Lam & Partners Eye Center, Suite 1515, Central Building, 1-3 Peddler Street, Central, Hong KongC-MER (Shenzhen) Dennis Lam Eye Hospital, Shenzhen 518000, ChinaDennis Lam & Partners Eye Center, Suite 1515, Central Building, 1-3 Peddler Street, Central, Hong KongPurpose. To evaluate and compare the accuracy of different intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas for eyes with an axial length (AL) greater than 26.00 mm. Methods. This study reviewed 407 eyes of 219 patients with AL longer than 26.0 mm. The refractive prediction errors of IOL power calculation formulas (SRK/T, Haigis, Holladay, Hoffer Q, and Barrett Universal II) using User Group for Laser Interference Biometry (ULIB) constants were evaluated and compared. Results. One hundred seventy-one eyes were enrolled. The Barrett Universal II formula had the lowest mean absolute error (MAE) and SRK/T and Haigis had similar MAE, and the statistical highest MAE were seen with the Holladay and Hoffer Q formulas. The interquartile range of the Barrett Universal II formula was also the lowest among all the formulas. The Barrett Universal II formulas yielded the highest percentage of eyes within ±1.0 D and ±0.5 D of the target refraction in this study (97.24% and 79.56%, resp.). Conclusions. Barrett Universal II formula produced the lowest predictive error and the least variable predictive error compared with the SRK/T, Haigis, Holladay, and Hoffer Q formulas. For high myopic eyes, the Barrett Universal II formula may be a more suitable choice.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/1917268 |
| spellingShingle | Yichi Zhang Xiao Ying Liang Shu Liu Jacky W. Y. Lee Srinivasan Bhaskar Dennis S. C. Lam Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Highly Myopic Eyes Journal of Ophthalmology |
| title | Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Highly Myopic Eyes |
| title_full | Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Highly Myopic Eyes |
| title_fullStr | Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Highly Myopic Eyes |
| title_full_unstemmed | Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Highly Myopic Eyes |
| title_short | Accuracy of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Highly Myopic Eyes |
| title_sort | accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation formulas for highly myopic eyes |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/1917268 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT yichizhang accuracyofintraocularlenspowercalculationformulasforhighlymyopiceyes AT xiaoyingliang accuracyofintraocularlenspowercalculationformulasforhighlymyopiceyes AT shuliu accuracyofintraocularlenspowercalculationformulasforhighlymyopiceyes AT jackywylee accuracyofintraocularlenspowercalculationformulasforhighlymyopiceyes AT srinivasanbhaskar accuracyofintraocularlenspowercalculationformulasforhighlymyopiceyes AT dennissclam accuracyofintraocularlenspowercalculationformulasforhighlymyopiceyes |