Accuracy of Ten Intraocular Lens Formulas in Spherical Equivalent of Toric Intraocular Lens Power Calculation

十种人工晶状体公式在计算散光人工晶状体度数球面等效值方面的准确性

阅读:1

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this work is to evaluate the accuracy of the Barrett Universal II (BU II), Emmetropia verifying optical (EVO) 2.0, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Hoffer QST (Savini/Taroni) (HQST), Holladay 1, Kane, Ladas Super, Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraff/theoretical (SRK/T), and T2 intraocular lens (IOL) power formulas for calculating spherical equivalent (SE) of toric IOL. METHODS: This study enrolled consecutive patients who underwent phacoemulsification and toric IOL implantation at the Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University in Hangzhou from 2015 to 2022. We compared the new-generation formulas with Gaussian optics-based standard formulas, and calculated the mean absolute error (MAE), median absolute error (MedAE), and percentage of eyes within ± 0.25 diopter (D), ± 0.50 D, ± 0.75 D and ± 1.00 D of the target refraction. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the anterior chamber depth (ACD), keratometry (K), and toricity (T). RESULTS: A total of 207 eyes of 207 patients were included in this study. Overall, the Kane and EVO2.0 formulas demonstrated the lowest MedAEs. The EVO2.0 formula exhibited the highest percentage of eyes within ± 0.50 D, ± 0.75 D, ± 1.00 D. Moreover, the EVO2.0 formula showed the lowest MedAE for flat K subgroup, the highest percentage of eyes within ± 0.50 D, ± 1.00 D for shallow ACD subgroup, the highest percentage of eyes within ± 0.75 D for regular ACD, flat K, T2-T3, T4-T5 subgroups. The Kane and formula performed the lowest MedAE in the T4-T5 subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Application of the Kane and EVO2.0 formulas significantly improved the prediction of postoperative SE outcome for toric IOL compared to the other formulas.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。