Cargando…

Does Every Calculation Formula Fit for All Types of Intraocular Lenses? Optimization of Constants for Tecnis ZA9003 and ZCB00 Is Necessary

Background and Objectives: To evaluate the performance of intraocular lenses (IOLs) using power calculation formulas on different types of IOL. Materials and Methods: 120 eyes and four IOL types (BioLine Yellow Accurate Aspheric IOL (i-Medical), TECNIS ZCB00, TECNIS ZA9003 (Johnson & Johnson) (3...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Popov, Ivajlo, Popova, Veronika, Sekac, Juraj, Krasnik, Vladimir
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8065659/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33808187
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina57040319
_version_ 1783682392747147264
author Popov, Ivajlo
Popova, Veronika
Sekac, Juraj
Krasnik, Vladimir
author_facet Popov, Ivajlo
Popova, Veronika
Sekac, Juraj
Krasnik, Vladimir
author_sort Popov, Ivajlo
collection PubMed
description Background and Objectives: To evaluate the performance of intraocular lenses (IOLs) using power calculation formulas on different types of IOL. Materials and Methods: 120 eyes and four IOL types (BioLine Yellow Accurate Aspheric IOL (i-Medical), TECNIS ZCB00, TECNIS ZA9003 (Johnson & Johnson) (3-piece IOL) and Softec HD (Lenstec)) were analyzed. The performance of Haigis, Barret Universal II and SKR-II formulas were compared between IOL types. The mean prediction error (ME) and mean absolute prediction error (MAE) were analyzed. Results: The overall percentage of eyes predicted within ±0.25 diopters (D) was 40.8% for Barret; 39.2% Haigis and 31.7% for SRK-II. Barret and Haigis had a significantly lower MAE than SRK-II (p < 0.05). The results differed among IOL types. The largest portion of eyes predicted within ±0.25 D was with the Barret formula in ZCB00 (33.3%) and ZA9003 (43.3%). Haigis was the most accurate in Softec HD (50%) and SRK-II in Biolline Yellow IOL (50%). ZCB00 showed a clinically significant hypermetropic ME compared to other IOLs. Conclusions: In general, Barret formulas had the best performance as a universal formula. However, the formula should be chosen according to the type of IOL in order to obtain the best results. Constant optimizations are necessary for the Tecnis IOL ZCB00 and ZA9003, as all of the analyzed formulas achieved a clinically significant poor performance in this type of IOL. ZCB00 also showed a hypermetropic shift in ME in all the formulas.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8065659
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80656592021-04-25 Does Every Calculation Formula Fit for All Types of Intraocular Lenses? Optimization of Constants for Tecnis ZA9003 and ZCB00 Is Necessary Popov, Ivajlo Popova, Veronika Sekac, Juraj Krasnik, Vladimir Medicina (Kaunas) Article Background and Objectives: To evaluate the performance of intraocular lenses (IOLs) using power calculation formulas on different types of IOL. Materials and Methods: 120 eyes and four IOL types (BioLine Yellow Accurate Aspheric IOL (i-Medical), TECNIS ZCB00, TECNIS ZA9003 (Johnson & Johnson) (3-piece IOL) and Softec HD (Lenstec)) were analyzed. The performance of Haigis, Barret Universal II and SKR-II formulas were compared between IOL types. The mean prediction error (ME) and mean absolute prediction error (MAE) were analyzed. Results: The overall percentage of eyes predicted within ±0.25 diopters (D) was 40.8% for Barret; 39.2% Haigis and 31.7% for SRK-II. Barret and Haigis had a significantly lower MAE than SRK-II (p < 0.05). The results differed among IOL types. The largest portion of eyes predicted within ±0.25 D was with the Barret formula in ZCB00 (33.3%) and ZA9003 (43.3%). Haigis was the most accurate in Softec HD (50%) and SRK-II in Biolline Yellow IOL (50%). ZCB00 showed a clinically significant hypermetropic ME compared to other IOLs. Conclusions: In general, Barret formulas had the best performance as a universal formula. However, the formula should be chosen according to the type of IOL in order to obtain the best results. Constant optimizations are necessary for the Tecnis IOL ZCB00 and ZA9003, as all of the analyzed formulas achieved a clinically significant poor performance in this type of IOL. ZCB00 also showed a hypermetropic shift in ME in all the formulas. MDPI 2021-03-30 /pmc/articles/PMC8065659/ /pubmed/33808187 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina57040319 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Popov, Ivajlo
Popova, Veronika
Sekac, Juraj
Krasnik, Vladimir
Does Every Calculation Formula Fit for All Types of Intraocular Lenses? Optimization of Constants for Tecnis ZA9003 and ZCB00 Is Necessary
title Does Every Calculation Formula Fit for All Types of Intraocular Lenses? Optimization of Constants for Tecnis ZA9003 and ZCB00 Is Necessary
title_full Does Every Calculation Formula Fit for All Types of Intraocular Lenses? Optimization of Constants for Tecnis ZA9003 and ZCB00 Is Necessary
title_fullStr Does Every Calculation Formula Fit for All Types of Intraocular Lenses? Optimization of Constants for Tecnis ZA9003 and ZCB00 Is Necessary
title_full_unstemmed Does Every Calculation Formula Fit for All Types of Intraocular Lenses? Optimization of Constants for Tecnis ZA9003 and ZCB00 Is Necessary
title_short Does Every Calculation Formula Fit for All Types of Intraocular Lenses? Optimization of Constants for Tecnis ZA9003 and ZCB00 Is Necessary
title_sort does every calculation formula fit for all types of intraocular lenses? optimization of constants for tecnis za9003 and zcb00 is necessary
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8065659/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33808187
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina57040319
work_keys_str_mv AT popovivajlo doeseverycalculationformulafitforalltypesofintraocularlensesoptimizationofconstantsfortecnisza9003andzcb00isnecessary
AT popovaveronika doeseverycalculationformulafitforalltypesofintraocularlensesoptimizationofconstantsfortecnisza9003andzcb00isnecessary
AT sekacjuraj doeseverycalculationformulafitforalltypesofintraocularlensesoptimizationofconstantsfortecnisza9003andzcb00isnecessary
AT krasnikvladimir doeseverycalculationformulafitforalltypesofintraocularlensesoptimizationofconstantsfortecnisza9003andzcb00isnecessary