Cargando…

Intraocular lens power calculation for plus and minus lenses in high myopia using partial coherence interferometry

PURPOSE: We assessed the accuracy of lens power calculation in highly myopic patients implanting plus and minus intraocular lenses (IOL). METHODS: We included 58 consecutive, myopic eyes with an axial length (AL) > 26.0 mm, undergoing phacoemulsification and IOL implantation following biometry us...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fuest, Matthias, Plange, Niklas, Kuerten, David, Schellhase, Hannah, Mazinani, Babac A. E., Walter, Peter, Kohnen, Stephan, Widder, Randolf A., Roessler, Gernot
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8087604/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33521894
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10792-020-01684-y
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: We assessed the accuracy of lens power calculation in highly myopic patients implanting plus and minus intraocular lenses (IOL). METHODS: We included 58 consecutive, myopic eyes with an axial length (AL) > 26.0 mm, undergoing phacoemulsification and IOL implantation following biometry using the IOLMaster 500. For lens power calculation, the Haigis formula was used in all cases. For comparison, refraction was back-calculated using the Barrett Universal II (Barrett), Holladay I, Hill-RBF (RBF) and SRK/T formulae. RESULTS: The mean axial length was 30.17 ± 2.67 mm. Barrett (80%), Haigis (87%) and RBF (82%) showed comparable numbers of IOLs within 1 diopter (D) of target refraction. Visual acuity (BSCVA) improved (p < 0.001) from 0.60 ± 0.35 to 0.29 ± 0.29 logMAR (> 28-days postsurgery). The median absolute error (MedAE) of Barrett 0.49 D, Haigis 0.38, RBF 0.44 and SRK/T 0.44 did not differ. The MedAE of Haigis was significantly smaller than Holladay (0.75 D; p = 0.01). All median postoperative refractive errors (MedRE) differed significantly with the exception of Haigis to SRK/T (p = 0.6): Barrett − 0.33 D, Haigis 0.25, Holladay 0.63, RBF 0.04 and SRK/T 0.13. Barrett, Haigis, Holladay and RBF showed a tendency for higher MedAEs in their minus compared to plus IOLs, which only reached significance for SRK/T (p = 0.001). Barrett (p < 0.001) and RBF (p = 0.04) showed myopic, SRK/T (p = 002) a hyperopic shift in their minus IOLs. CONCLUSIONS: In highly myopic patients, the accuracies of Barrett, Haigis and RBF were comparable with a tendency for higher MedAEs in minus IOLs. Barrett and RBF showed myopic, SRK/T a hyperopic shift in their minus IOLs.