Cargando…

Accuracy of five intraocular lens formulas in eyes with trifocal lens implant

Accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulas SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Haigis and Barrett Universal II were compared in prediction of postoperative refraction for multifocal and implants using a single optical biometry device. The authors included 88 refractive lens exchange and catara...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mălăescu, Monica, Stanca, Horia T., Tăbăcaru, Bogdana, Stănilă, Adriana, Stanca, Simona, Danielescu, Ciprian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: D.A. Spandidos 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7401767/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32765746
http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.8891
_version_ 1783566625785511936
author Mălăescu, Monica
Stanca, Horia T.
Tăbăcaru, Bogdana
Stănilă, Adriana
Stanca, Simona
Danielescu, Ciprian
author_facet Mălăescu, Monica
Stanca, Horia T.
Tăbăcaru, Bogdana
Stănilă, Adriana
Stanca, Simona
Danielescu, Ciprian
author_sort Mălăescu, Monica
collection PubMed
description Accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulas SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Haigis and Barrett Universal II were compared in prediction of postoperative refraction for multifocal and implants using a single optical biometry device. The authors included 88 refractive lens exchange and cataract surgeries, with AcrySof IQ PanOptix implant (Alcon Laboratories, Inc.). All eyes were divided into three groups based on axial length (AL), group 1: <22 mm (14 eyes), group 2: 22-24.5 mm (68 eyes) and group 3: >24.5 mm (6 eyes). The refractive prediction error (RPE) and mean absolute error (MAE) were calculated for 5 different formulas: SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Haigis and Barrett Universal II. For eyes with the AL between 22 mm and 24.5 mm the greatest percentage of eyes with RPEs within ±0.25 D was 32.4% for Haigis formula, followed by Barrett Universal II, Hoffer Q and Holladay 1 with 29.4%. The percentage of eyes with RPEs within ±0.50 D was 100% only for Barrett Universal II and Holladay 1, 94.1% for SRK/T and 91.2% for Haigis and Hoffer Q. The first and third group with AL <22 and >24.5 mm were too small to have statistical significance due to the reluctancy to use multifocal IOLs on extreme ALs. ANOVA test showed no statistical difference (P=0.166) between the RPEs measured for each formula in this cohort. This study showed no statistical difference between formulas for this trifocal lens implant. There was a tendency for the RPE to be within ±0.25 D for most of the eyes with the Haigis formula, and within ±0.50 D for all the eyes with the Barrett Universal II formula in the group with the AL between 22 and 24.5 mm.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7401767
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher D.A. Spandidos
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74017672020-08-05 Accuracy of five intraocular lens formulas in eyes with trifocal lens implant Mălăescu, Monica Stanca, Horia T. Tăbăcaru, Bogdana Stănilă, Adriana Stanca, Simona Danielescu, Ciprian Exp Ther Med Articles Accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulas SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Haigis and Barrett Universal II were compared in prediction of postoperative refraction for multifocal and implants using a single optical biometry device. The authors included 88 refractive lens exchange and cataract surgeries, with AcrySof IQ PanOptix implant (Alcon Laboratories, Inc.). All eyes were divided into three groups based on axial length (AL), group 1: <22 mm (14 eyes), group 2: 22-24.5 mm (68 eyes) and group 3: >24.5 mm (6 eyes). The refractive prediction error (RPE) and mean absolute error (MAE) were calculated for 5 different formulas: SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Haigis and Barrett Universal II. For eyes with the AL between 22 mm and 24.5 mm the greatest percentage of eyes with RPEs within ±0.25 D was 32.4% for Haigis formula, followed by Barrett Universal II, Hoffer Q and Holladay 1 with 29.4%. The percentage of eyes with RPEs within ±0.50 D was 100% only for Barrett Universal II and Holladay 1, 94.1% for SRK/T and 91.2% for Haigis and Hoffer Q. The first and third group with AL <22 and >24.5 mm were too small to have statistical significance due to the reluctancy to use multifocal IOLs on extreme ALs. ANOVA test showed no statistical difference (P=0.166) between the RPEs measured for each formula in this cohort. This study showed no statistical difference between formulas for this trifocal lens implant. There was a tendency for the RPE to be within ±0.25 D for most of the eyes with the Haigis formula, and within ±0.50 D for all the eyes with the Barrett Universal II formula in the group with the AL between 22 and 24.5 mm. D.A. Spandidos 2020-09 2020-06-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7401767/ /pubmed/32765746 http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.8891 Text en Copyright: © Mălăescu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Articles
Mălăescu, Monica
Stanca, Horia T.
Tăbăcaru, Bogdana
Stănilă, Adriana
Stanca, Simona
Danielescu, Ciprian
Accuracy of five intraocular lens formulas in eyes with trifocal lens implant
title Accuracy of five intraocular lens formulas in eyes with trifocal lens implant
title_full Accuracy of five intraocular lens formulas in eyes with trifocal lens implant
title_fullStr Accuracy of five intraocular lens formulas in eyes with trifocal lens implant
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy of five intraocular lens formulas in eyes with trifocal lens implant
title_short Accuracy of five intraocular lens formulas in eyes with trifocal lens implant
title_sort accuracy of five intraocular lens formulas in eyes with trifocal lens implant
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7401767/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32765746
http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.8891
work_keys_str_mv AT malaescumonica accuracyoffiveintraocularlensformulasineyeswithtrifocallensimplant
AT stancahoriat accuracyoffiveintraocularlensformulasineyeswithtrifocallensimplant
AT tabacarubogdana accuracyoffiveintraocularlensformulasineyeswithtrifocallensimplant
AT stanilaadriana accuracyoffiveintraocularlensformulasineyeswithtrifocallensimplant
AT stancasimona accuracyoffiveintraocularlensformulasineyeswithtrifocallensimplant
AT danielescuciprian accuracyoffiveintraocularlensformulasineyeswithtrifocallensimplant