Cargando…

Intraocular Lens Power Calculation after Corneal Refractive Surgery

PURPOSE: To report refractive outcomes following phacoemulsification (PE) and posterior chamber intraocular lens (PCIOL) implantation in eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery. METHODS: In this retrospective comparative study, 18 consecutive eyes of 14 patients with previous keratorefractive...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Javadi, Mohammad-Ali, Feizi, Sepehr, Malekifar, Parviz
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Ophthalmic Research Center 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3381097/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22737381
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: To report refractive outcomes following phacoemulsification (PE) and posterior chamber intraocular lens (PCIOL) implantation in eyes with previous corneal refractive surgery. METHODS: In this retrospective comparative study, 18 consecutive eyes of 14 patients with previous keratorefractive surgery for myopia including photorefractive keratectomy (PRK, 6 eyes; 33.3%) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK, 12 eyes; 66.7%) underwent PE+PCIOL. Computerized corneal topography was employed to determine the flattest keratometric reading within the 3-mm central zone. This value was inserted into the Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraff/T (SRK/T) formula to calculate IOL power. IOL power selected for implantation was 1 D greater than the calculated value described above. RESULTS: Mean age and follow-up period were 54.1±11.5 years and 29.9±26.3 months, respectively. Mean implanted lens power was 18.56±3.86 D which was not significantly different from mean back-calculated IOL power for target refraction (19.04±4.16 D) (P=0.28). There was no significant difference between mean target refraction (−0.94±0.52 D) and achieved postoperative spherical equivalent refractive error (−0.62±1.06) at final follow-up (P=0.28). The achieved spherical equivalent refractive error was within ±0.50 D of intended refraction in 8 (44.4%) eyes, within ±1.0 D in 11 (61.1%) eyes, and within ±2.0 D in 16 (88.9%) eyes. In a subgroup of patients (5 eyes) with complete pre-refractive surgery data, the difference between post-refractive surgery keratometry method and all other methods (P=0.02) and between the current method and the Feiz-Mannis method (P=0.01) was statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The method suggested herein is simple and independent of pre-refractive surgery data with results comparable to other commonly used methods.