Cargando…

Accuracy of the FY-L formula in calculating intraocular lens power after small-incision lenticule extraction

PURPOSE: The study aimed to assess the accuracy of the FY-L formula in calculating intraocular lens (IOL) power after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). METHODS: For the post-SMILE IOL calculation of the same eye, the IOL power targeting the pre-SMILE eyes' lowest myopic refractive er...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hu, Yingfeng, Lin, Liqun, Zeng, Danqi, Wang, Yan, Zhang, Rong, Zhang, Zhe, Wang, Zheng, Zhang, Guangbin, Ye, Xiangyu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10483841/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37692774
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2023.1241824
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: The study aimed to assess the accuracy of the FY-L formula in calculating intraocular lens (IOL) power after small-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE). METHODS: For the post-SMILE IOL calculation of the same eye, the IOL power targeting the pre-SMILE eyes' lowest myopic refractive error was used. The FY-L formula, the Emmetropia Verifying Optical Formula (EVO-L), the Barrett True-K no history, and the Shammas-L, respectively, were used to calculate the predicted refractive error of target IOL power. A comparison was made between the change in spherical equivalent induced by SMILE (SMILE-Dif) and the variance between IOL-Dif (IOL-Induced Refractive Error) before and after SMILE. The prediction error (PE) was defined as SMILE-Dif minus IOL-Dif. The proportion of eyes with PEs within ±0.25 D, ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D, the numerical and absolute prediction errors (PEs and AEs), and the median absolute error (MedAE) were compared. RESULTS: In total, 80 eyes from 42 patients who underwent SMILE were included in the study. The FY-L formula generated the sample's lowest mean PE (0.06 ± 0.76 D), MAE (0.58 ± 0.50 D), and MedAE (0.47 D), respectively. The PEs in ±0.25 D, ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D comprised 28.8%, 46.3%, 70.0%, and 87.5%, respectively, for the FY-L formula. Compared to other formulas, the FY-L formula produced the highest value with PEs for the percentage of eyes in ±0.50 D, ±0.75 D, and ±1.00 D. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the FY-L formula provides satisfactory outcomes in estimating the IOL power in the eyes after SMILE.