Influence of pupil dilation on the Barrett universal II (new generation), Haigis (4th generation), and SRK/T (3rd generation) intraocular lens calculation formulas: a retrospective study

Teshigawara, Takeshi; Meguro, Akira; Mizuki, Nobuhisa

doi:10.1186/s12886-020-01571-1

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(53 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some of the newer generation formulas, such as the Holladay 2, 2,28 Hill-RBF 2.0, 3 Olsen, 4 and Barrett Universal II formulas, which demonstrate better predictability, recommend use of WTW distance as an input variable. 5,29 In a recent study by Darcy et al, 30 a good outcome was also achieved among a large population with a mean AL of 23.65 ± 1.34 mm using the Barrett formula without WTW distance as an input variable. However, for highly myopic cases with relatively unsatisfactory calculation accuracy, especially for extremely long eyes (AL > 30 mm), inputting more anterior segment variables might help to improve accuracy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…1 Currently, the WTW distance is also frequently considered during cataract surgeries. It is a variable used in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas, especially new generation formulas such as the Holladay 2, 2 Hill-RBF 2.0, 3 Olsen, 4 and Barrett Universal II formulas, 5 and is also considered to be a factor influencing corneal astigmatism after cataract surgery. 6 More importantly, it is now also included in surgical planning for refractive cataract procedures.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of the White-to-White Distance in 39,986 Chinese Cataractous Eyes

Wei

Meng

et al. 2021

Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE.To investigate the distribution of white-to-white (WTW) distance and its associations with other biometric parameters in Chinese cataractous eyes. METHODS.Data on 39,986 eyes from 23,627 Chinese cataract patients were analyzed. Ocular biometric parameters, including WTW distance, corneal curvature, anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), central corneal thickness (CCT), and axial length (AL), were obtained using the ZEISS IOLMaster 700. RESULTS.The mean age of patients was 63.7 ± 12.4 years, and 57.61% were female. The mean WTW distance was 11.69 ± 0.46 mm. The WTW distance was larger in male patients than in female patients for all age groups (all P < 0.001). The WTW distance was positively correlated with corneal curvature and ACD and negatively correlated with age, LT, and CCT (all P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed that a larger WTW distance was associated with younger age; male gender; larger corneal curvature, ACD, and LT; and thinner CCT (all P < 0.001). Notably, the association between WTW distance and AL was not linear. As the AL increased, the WTW distance initially increased, reached a peak in the group with ALs of 24.5 to 26 mm, and then slowly decreased. However, all of the myopic eyes (AL > 24.5 mm) still had larger WTWs than the normal and short eyes (AL ≤ 24.5 mm). CONCLUSIONS.In Chinese cataractous eyes, the WTW distance was larger in younger male patients with flatter corneas, deeper anterior chambers, thicker lenses, and thinner central corneas. The association between WTW distance and AL was not linear, and WTW distance was the largest in eyes with ALs of 24.5 to 26 mm.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the White-to-White Distance in 39,986 Chinese Cataractous Eyes

Wei

Meng

et al. 2021

Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to a linear extrapolation of the earlier analysis by Teshigawara et al, the offset of 0.07 mm corresponds to a change in predictive refraction <0.2 D and would partially compensate for the effect of deeper ACD measurement. 28 In our data, the LoAs and the CCCs are worse for the formulas that involve ACD or LT in IOL power calculation compared with the Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T formulas that do not involve these parameters. This finding indicates that the ACD and LT measurements of Biometer A and B should not be used interchangeably but influence the IOL power calculation of modern formulas.…”

Section: Accuracy Of Iol Power Calculationmentioning

confidence: 49%

“…According to the analysis by Teshigawara, a change in CD of 0.2 mm would affect the PE by <0.1 D, which is a strong indication that the significant mean difference has little clinical relevance for the IOL power calculation. 28 Biometric formulas have evolved steadily, increasing the accuracy of refractive outcomes. In our study, which was powered to detect differences of 0.25 D in PE, there was a tendency toward higher MedAE, MAE, and SD of PE for Biometer B compared with Biometer A, but none of these results were statistically significant.…”

Section: Accuracy Of Iol Power Calculationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agreement of intraocular lens power calculation between 2 SS-OCT–based biometers

Pfaeffli

Weber

Hoffer

et al. 2022

J Cataract Refract Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Methods: Axial length (AL), keratometry (K), anterior chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), and corneal diameter (CD) were measured with the IOLMaster 700 (Biometer A) and Anterion (Biometer B). Agreement was quantified by the limits of agreement and concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). The PE, the median absolute error, and the mean absolute error of the Barrett Universal II, EVO 2.0, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Kane, and SRK/T formulas were investigated after constant optimization.

show abstract

“…There are reports on the influence of pupil dilation on the accuracy of IOL power calculation formulas. 24 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness, Sensitivity, and Specificity of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Short Eyes

Stopyra¹

2022

tjo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To compare intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas in terms of absolute error (AE) and receiver operating characteristic curves in eyes with axial length (AL) shorter than 22.0 mm. Materials and Methods: The data of hyperopic patients who underwent uneventful phacoemulsification with IOL implantation in MW-med Eye Centre, Cracow, Poland between October 2015 and June 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. IOL power was calculated using Holladay1, SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay2, Haigis, and Barrett Universal II formulas. The power of the implanted lens was based on Hoffer Q. Three months after phacoemulsification, refraction was measured and AE was calculated. The percentage of patients with full visual acuity without any correction and the percentage of hyperopic patients was determined for each formula. Receiver operating characteristic curves with cut-off points for AL were drawn for each formula and the area under the curve was evaluated. Results: Fifty-six patients (62 eyes) whose ocular AL ranged between 20.58 mm and 21.97 mm were included in the study. Hoffer Q formula yielded the lowest mean AE (0.09±0.08 D), the highest percentage of patients with full visual acuity without correction (75.8%), and the lowest rate of postoperative hyperopia (8.1%). However, the SRK/T formula had the largest area under the curve (0.667). Conclusion: The Hoffer Q formula gave the lowest level of AE in the study and seems to be recommendable for IOL power calculation for hyperopic eyes. Further studies are needed on the use of receiver operating characteristic curves in assessing the effectiveness of IOL power calculation formulas.

show abstract

Influence of pupil dilation on the Barrett universal II (new generation), Haigis (4th generation), and SRK/T (3rd generation) intraocular lens calculation formulas: a retrospective study

Cited by 12 publications

References 20 publications

Evaluation of the White-to-White Distance in 39,986 Chinese Cataractous Eyes

Evaluation of the White-to-White Distance in 39,986 Chinese Cataractous Eyes

Agreement of intraocular lens power calculation between 2 SS-OCT–based biometers

Effectiveness, Sensitivity, and Specificity of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Short Eyes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About