Citation:Wang JK,Chang SW.Optical biometry intraocular lens power calculation using different formulas in patients with different axial lengths.Int J Ophthalmol 2013;6(2):150-154,doi:10.3980/j.issn.2222-3959.2013.02.08
Optical biometry intraocular lens power calculation using different formulas in patients with different axial lengths
Received:August 05, 2012  Revised:March 20, 2013
Email this Article  Add to Favorites  Print
DOI:10.3980/j.issn.2222-3959.2013.02.08
Key Words:intraocular lens; optical biometry; calculation formula
Fund Project:This study was supported by grants of Far Eastern Memorial Hospital (FEMH-97-HHC-008), Taiwan, China
     
AuthorInstitution
Jia-Kang Wang Department of Ophthalmology, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, China;
Oriental Institute of Technology, Taipei, Taiwan, China;
Department of Medicine, National Yang Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, China
Shu-Wen Chang Department of Ophthalmology, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, China
Hits: 2189
Download times: 835
Abstract:
      AIM:To investigate the predictability of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation using the IOLMaster and different IOL power calculation formulas in eyes with various axial length (AL).

    METHODS:Patients were included who underwent uneventful phacoemulsification with IOL implantation in the Department of Ophthalmology, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, Chinafrom February 2007 to January 2009. Preoperative AL and keratometric values (Ks) were measured by IOLMaster optical biometry. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on AL less than 22mm (Group 1), 22–26mm (Group 2), and more than 26mm (Group 3). The power of the implanted IOL was used to calculate the predicted postoperative spherical equivalence (SE) by various formulas:the Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T. The predictive accuracy of each formula was analyzed by comparing the difference between the actual and predicted postoperative SE (MedAE, median absolute error). All the patients had follow-up periods exceeding 3 months.

    RESULTS:Totally, there were 200 eyes (33 eyes in Group 1, 92 eyes in Group 2, 75 eyes in Group 3). In all patients, the Haigis had the significantly lower MedAE generated by the other formulas (P<0.05). In Group 1 to 3, the MedAE calculated by the Haigis was either significantly lower or comparable to those calculated by the other formulas.

    CONCLUSION:Compared with other formulas using IOLMaster biometric data, the Haigis formula yields superior refractive results in eyes with various AL.

PMC FullText Html:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3633751/
PDF Fulltext  Download reader  HTML Fulltext   View/Add Comment