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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |