Comparison of Predictability Using Barrett Universal II and SRK/T Formulas according to Keratometry
Purpose. To compare the predictability of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation using the Barrett Universal II and the SRK/T formulas, according to the keratometry. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical charts of 335 consecutive eyes undergoing standard cataract surgery. IOL power cal...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2020-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Ophthalmology |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/7625725 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832568650614177792 |
|---|---|
| author | Kei Iijima Kazutaka Kamiya Yoshihiko Iida Nobuyuki Shoji |
| author_facet | Kei Iijima Kazutaka Kamiya Yoshihiko Iida Nobuyuki Shoji |
| author_sort | Kei Iijima |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Purpose. To compare the predictability of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation using the Barrett Universal II and the SRK/T formulas, according to the keratometry. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical charts of 335 consecutive eyes undergoing standard cataract surgery. IOL power calculations were performed using the Barrett Universal II and the SRK/T formulas. We compared the prediction error, the absolute error, and the percentages within ±0.25, ±0.5, and ±1.0 D of the targeted refraction, 1 month postoperatively, and also investigated the relationship of these outcomes with the keratometric readings, using the two formulas. Results. The prediction error using the SRK/T formula was significantly more myopic than that using the Barrett Universal II formula (the paired t-test, p<0.001). The absolute error using the SRK/T formula was significantly larger than that using the Barrett Universal II formula (p=0.006). We found a significant correlation between the prediction error and the keratometric readings using the SRK/T formula (Pearson correlation coefficient, r = −0.522, p<0.001), but there was no significant correlation between them using the Barrett Universal II formula (r = −0.031, p=0.576). Conclusions. The Barrett Universal II formula provides a better predictability of IOL power calculation and is less susceptible to the effect of the corneal shape, than the SRK/T formula. The Barrett Universal formula, instead of the SRK/T formula, may be clinically helpful for improving the refractive accuracy, especially in eyes with steep or flat corneas. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-8c5e1fce3d7f496aab16ec39bb65987d |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2090-004X 2090-0058 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2020-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Ophthalmology |
| spelling | doaj-art-8c5e1fce3d7f496aab16ec39bb65987d2025-02-03T00:58:40ZengWileyJournal of Ophthalmology2090-004X2090-00582020-01-01202010.1155/2020/76257257625725Comparison of Predictability Using Barrett Universal II and SRK/T Formulas according to KeratometryKei Iijima0Kazutaka Kamiya1Yoshihiko Iida2Nobuyuki Shoji3Department of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, Kitasato University, Tokyo, JapanVisual Physiology, School of Allied Health Sciences, Kitasato University, Tokyo, JapanDepartment of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, Kitasato University, Tokyo, JapanDepartment of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, Kitasato University, Tokyo, JapanPurpose. To compare the predictability of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation using the Barrett Universal II and the SRK/T formulas, according to the keratometry. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical charts of 335 consecutive eyes undergoing standard cataract surgery. IOL power calculations were performed using the Barrett Universal II and the SRK/T formulas. We compared the prediction error, the absolute error, and the percentages within ±0.25, ±0.5, and ±1.0 D of the targeted refraction, 1 month postoperatively, and also investigated the relationship of these outcomes with the keratometric readings, using the two formulas. Results. The prediction error using the SRK/T formula was significantly more myopic than that using the Barrett Universal II formula (the paired t-test, p<0.001). The absolute error using the SRK/T formula was significantly larger than that using the Barrett Universal II formula (p=0.006). We found a significant correlation between the prediction error and the keratometric readings using the SRK/T formula (Pearson correlation coefficient, r = −0.522, p<0.001), but there was no significant correlation between them using the Barrett Universal II formula (r = −0.031, p=0.576). Conclusions. The Barrett Universal II formula provides a better predictability of IOL power calculation and is less susceptible to the effect of the corneal shape, than the SRK/T formula. The Barrett Universal formula, instead of the SRK/T formula, may be clinically helpful for improving the refractive accuracy, especially in eyes with steep or flat corneas.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/7625725 |
| spellingShingle | Kei Iijima Kazutaka Kamiya Yoshihiko Iida Nobuyuki Shoji Comparison of Predictability Using Barrett Universal II and SRK/T Formulas according to Keratometry Journal of Ophthalmology |
| title | Comparison of Predictability Using Barrett Universal II and SRK/T Formulas according to Keratometry |
| title_full | Comparison of Predictability Using Barrett Universal II and SRK/T Formulas according to Keratometry |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of Predictability Using Barrett Universal II and SRK/T Formulas according to Keratometry |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Predictability Using Barrett Universal II and SRK/T Formulas according to Keratometry |
| title_short | Comparison of Predictability Using Barrett Universal II and SRK/T Formulas according to Keratometry |
| title_sort | comparison of predictability using barrett universal ii and srk t formulas according to keratometry |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/7625725 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT keiiijima comparisonofpredictabilityusingbarrettuniversaliiandsrktformulasaccordingtokeratometry AT kazutakakamiya comparisonofpredictabilityusingbarrettuniversaliiandsrktformulasaccordingtokeratometry AT yoshihikoiida comparisonofpredictabilityusingbarrettuniversaliiandsrktformulasaccordingtokeratometry AT nobuyukishoji comparisonofpredictabilityusingbarrettuniversaliiandsrktformulasaccordingtokeratometry |