Intraocular lens power calculation after corneal refractive surgery

Feiz, Vahid

doi:10.4103/0974-9233.61219

Cited by 10 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The source of error of IOL power calculation after RK was found to be different from that after laser vision correction. 1–3 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The source of error of IOL power calculation after RK was found to be different from that after laser vision correction. [1][2][3] Radial keratotomy causes central flattening in a small central optical zone. Measuring keratometry (K) readings should include this small central zone to avoid overestimating corneal power, resulting in undesired postoperative hyperopic error.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accuracy of Traditional and Modern Formulas for Intraocular Lens Power Calculation After Radial Keratotomy Using Standard Keratometry

Helaly,

Elhady,

Elnaggar

2023

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To compare the accuracy of multiple traditional and modern intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas in post-radial keratotomy (RK) patients undergoing cataract surgery. Methods This retrospective case series included 50 eyes with prior RK who underwent routine phacoemulsification surgery with single-piece acrylic IOL implantation (A constant = 118.8). Outcomes of multiple formulas were calculated. Included formulas were SRK/T, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Haigis, Barrett True-K, Haigis and Barrett True-K (target refraction of 0.50 D), Barrett Universal II, Kane, PEARL-DGS, Shammas no history, DK SRK/T, DK SRK/T (target refraction of 0.50 D), Double K (DK) Holladay 1, and DK Holladay 1 (target refraction of 0.50 D). Averages of multiple combinations of best-performing single formulas were calculated. Primary outcome is mean absolute error (MAE). Results Haigis (with −0.50 D target refraction) and DK SRK/T showed the lowest mean and median absolute errors (MedAE) followed by Haigis, Barrett True-K, and Barrett True-K (with −0.50 D target refraction). Combinations of 3, 4, or 5 of best performing single formulas yielded good results with >60% of cases within +0.50 D of intended refraction and MAE around 0.50 D. The best performing formulas with flatter K readings were PEARL-DGS and Haigis (with additional −0.50 D target refraction) with MAE of 0.72 + 0.71 D and 0.70 + 0.70 D, respectively, followed by Barrett True-K (with intended −0.50 D target refraction) with MAE of 0.75 + 0.63 D. Conclusion Using an average of three or more Haigis (with −0.50 D target refraction), the Barrett True-K, DK Holladay 1, and DK SRK/T formulas showed better outcomes than using a single formula for IOLMaster 700 standard K readings. The PEARL-DGS formula showed better accuracy in eyes with flatter K readings (<38 D).

show abstract

“…The source of error of IOL power calculation after RK was found to be different from that after laser vision correction. 1–3 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%