Comparison of aphakic refraction formulas for secondary in-the-bag intraocular lens power estimation in children

Abdel-Hafez, Ghada; Trivedi, Rupal H.; Wilson, M. Edward; Bandyopadhyay, Dipankar

doi:10.1016/j.jaapos.2011.05.021

Cited by 14 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar difference of 0.8 D was found in the study of Abdel-Hafez. 11 This outcome may be due to the lower precision of preoperative AR compared to the precision of axial length measurements and keratometry measurements. Another explanation may be the variation in data that was introduced by different optometrists who performed the refraction preoperatively and postoperatively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of formulae for secondary intraocular lens power calculations in pediatric aphakia

Nakhli

Emarah

Jeddawi

2017

Journal of Current Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo compare the accuracy of axial length vergence formulas versus refractive vergence formulas for secondary intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in pediatric aphakia.MethodsThis retrospective comparative study, evaluated 31 eyes of 31 patients aged ≤3.5 years, who had undergone secondary IOL implantation. The median absolute error (MedAE) was compared between axial length vergence formulas (Hoffer Q, Holladay I, SRK II, and SRK/T) and refractive vergence formulas (Lanchulev, Holladay R, Mackool, and Khan) as well as between formulas within the same vergence.ResultsThere was a significant difference (P = 0.010) between MedAE for axial length vergence formulas [1.19 Diopter(D)] and MedAE for refractive vergence formulas (2.48 D). The MedAE of axial length vergence formulas were comparable as to Hoffer (1.59 D), Holladay (1.27 D), SRK/T (1.23 D), and SRK II (1.30 D). Among refractive vergence formulas, Lanchulev (5.00 D) and Holladay R (2.51 D) had significantly larger MedAE as compared to Khan (2.06 D) and Mackool (2.15 D).ConclusionAxial length vergence formulas performed significantly better than refractive vergence formulas; however, axial length vergence formulas were comparable within the same vergence.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of formulae for secondary intraocular lens power calculations in pediatric aphakia

Nakhli

Emarah

Jeddawi

2017

Journal of Current Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We calculated the PE at 3 months postoperatively as done by Abdel-Hafez et al 18 as most patients (73.56%) in our series had undergone IOL implantation through a scleral or limbal tunnel and these incisions would take 6–8 weeks to attain refractive stability 6 17. The mean absolute value of PE at 3 months observed in the present study, albeit slightly higher, was comparable to that reported in limited number of previous paediatric secondary IOL series (table 2).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The mean absolute value of PE at 3 months observed in the present study, albeit slightly higher, was comparable to that reported in limited number of previous paediatric secondary IOL series (table 2). 9 18 Moore et al 9 calculated the PE between 6 and 8 weeks whereas Nihalani and Vanderveen4 did the same between 4 and 8 weeks postoperatively. In the current study 20% had an absolute PE within 0.5 D and 60% within 2 D. In a study of 61 eyes with secondary ciliary sulcus-fixated IOL implantation, Awad et al 6 found that 78% of the patients had a postoperative refraction ±2 D of the predicted value.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Refractive outcomes and prediction error following secondary intraocular lens implantation in children: a decade-long analysis

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Neely et al [12] found that 23 % of the pediatric patients had a refractive outcome more than 2D from the anticipated result and the variability outcomes were found especially in children younger than 2 years of age and an AXL < 19 mm. Khan et al [13] in a retrospective study found that the ultrasonic AXL value and estimated AXL values had a difference of 0.05 mm and were not significantly different.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Our experience in ocular biometry in congenital and infantile cataract

Nicula¹,

Dorin²,

Nicolae³

et al. 2016

New Front Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To establish the importance of ocular biometry in congenital and infantile cataract upon the visual outcomes. Methods:The study was a retrospective study upon patients with congenital and infantile cataract. The study group included 58 eyes from 36 children. For cooperative children, for the ocular biometry we used the OCUSCAN biometer (Alcon, Forth Worth Tx). In very young children we used B-scan ultrasonography to measure the axial length (AXL) of the eye. The target refraction was hyperopia, concording with the age. Results:The measurement of axial length revealed an eye between 20 and above 25 mm. The correlation between axial length and age showed a rapid increase in the first 12 months, a smaller increase between 100-150 months and stabilization after 200 months (statistically significant-medium correlation). The correlation between keratometry and age showed higher values of keratometry at younger children, with a significant decrease in the first 12 months and a smaller rate of decrease after 24 months of age (statistically significant-high correlation). Conclusion:our study shows that the axial length increases during childhood, especially in the first 2 years and the corneal curvature decreases from birth to different ages, parameters which induce the target refraction.

show abstract

Comparison of aphakic refraction formulas for secondary in-the-bag intraocular lens power estimation in children

Cited by 14 publications

References 3 publications

Accuracy of formulae for secondary intraocular lens power calculations in pediatric aphakia

Accuracy of formulae for secondary intraocular lens power calculations in pediatric aphakia

Refractive outcomes and prediction error following secondary intraocular lens implantation in children: a decade-long analysis

Our experience in ocular biometry in congenital and infantile cataract

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About