Cargando…

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Iijima, Kei, Kamiya, Kazutaka, Iida, Yoshihiko, Shoji, Nobuyuki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7321508/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32655942
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/7625725
_version_ 1783551483125432320
author Iijima, Kei
Kamiya, Kazutaka
Iida, Yoshihiko
Shoji, Nobuyuki
author_facet Iijima, Kei
Kamiya, Kazutaka
Iida, Yoshihiko
Shoji, Nobuyuki
author_sort Iijima, Kei
collection PubMed
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 Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7321508
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73215082020-07-11 Comparison of Predictability Using Barrett Universal II and SRK/T Formulas according to Keratometry Iijima, Kei Kamiya, Kazutaka Iida, Yoshihiko Shoji, Nobuyuki J Ophthalmol Research Article 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. Hindawi 2020-06-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7321508/ /pubmed/32655942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/7625725 Text en Copyright © 2020 Kei Iijima et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Iijima, Kei
Kamiya, Kazutaka
Iida, Yoshihiko
Shoji, Nobuyuki
Comparison of Predictability Using Barrett Universal II and SRK/T Formulas according to Keratometry
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
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7321508/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32655942
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/7625725
work_keys_str_mv AT iijimakei comparisonofpredictabilityusingbarrettuniversaliiandsrktformulasaccordingtokeratometry
AT kamiyakazutaka comparisonofpredictabilityusingbarrettuniversaliiandsrktformulasaccordingtokeratometry
AT iidayoshihiko comparisonofpredictabilityusingbarrettuniversaliiandsrktformulasaccordingtokeratometry
AT shojinobuyuki comparisonofpredictabilityusingbarrettuniversaliiandsrktformulasaccordingtokeratometry