Search

Background: We evaluated whether the best‐fit intraocular lens (IOL) power formula for the first operated eye (BF1) was also the most accurate formula for the second eye. Methods: This was a retrospective study of 152 patients who underwent uncomplicated delayed bilateral cataract surgery with a minimum delay of 3 weeks using only one 1‐piece IOL (HOYA, Vivinex) at the Medical University of Vienna, Austria. Seven different formulae (Barrett Universal II, Castrop, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Kane, and SRK/T) were investigated to test the formula selection approach with regard to the calculated mean and median absolute prediction errors (MAE/MedAE). Results: The mean intraindividual difference in axial length was 0.2 mm (±0.3 mm). BF1 coincided with the best‐fit formula for the second eye (BF2) in 56% of patients (p < 0.05). Using BF1 for the second eye led to a lower MedAE (0.22 dioptre, D) than using a formula at random (0.33 D) and was less accurate than using the best‐fit formula for each eye separately (0.1 D). The MedAEs of all formulae were generally low, ranging from 0.28 to 0.35 D. Conclusion: Using BF1 for the second eye led to a lower MedAE than the random selection of a formula. Therefore, BF1 can be used for the second eye if the surgeon is unsure of the choice of formula. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background To evaluate the biometric factors associated with the accuracy of intraocular lens power predictions for cataract surgery in primary angle-closure (PAC) or primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG) eyes. Design Cross-sectional study Participants This study included 103 PAC or PACG patients who had undergone cataract surgery. Methods All participants underwent anterior-segment optical coherence tomography preoperatively. Two novel biometric factors - the relative lens vault (the ratio of lens vault to anterior vault) and the anterior vault (the sum of lens vault and anterior chamber depth) - were measured using customized software. The powers of the implanted intraocular lens and the actual postoperative refractive errors were compared. The mean refractive error and the median absolute error were calculated and compared using repeated measures ANOVA and Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test. The biometric factors associated with the postoperative refractive error were investigated by multivariate regression analysis. Main Outcome Measures Preoperative anterior-segment biometric factors, difference between predicted and actual postoperative refraction. Results The Haigis, Hoffer Q and SRK/T formulas all showed a slight tendency toward resultant hyperopia, respectively ( P < 0.001, P = 0.05, P = 0.003). The Hoffer Q formula had the least prediction error ( P < 0.001). In the multivariate regression analysis, the relative lens vault was the only independent factor predicting postoperative refractive error ( β = 0.392, P = 0.011). Conclusion Intraocular lens power predictions for cataract surgery in PAC or PACG patients can be inaccurate. Such results might be associated with anterior-segment biometric factors. Preoperative relative lens vault appears to be a significant factor predicting refractive outcome after cataract surgery in patients with PAC or PACG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To report the value of dual biometry in the detection of biometry errors. Methods: Study 1: retrospective study of 224 consecutive cataract operations. The intraocular lens power calculation was based on immersion biometry. Study 2: immersion biometry was compared with optical coherence biometry (OCB) in terms of axial length, anterior chamber depth, keratometry readings and the recommended lens power to achieve emmetropia. Study 3: prospective study of 61 consecutive cataract operations. Both immersion and OCB were performed, but lens power calculation was based on the latter. Results: Study 1: 115 (86%), 101 (75.4%), 90 (67.2%) and 50 (37.3%) of postoperative spherical equivalents were within ±1.5 dioptres (D), ±1.25 D, ±1 D and ±0.5 D of the target, respectively. Study 2: excellent agreement between axial length readings, anterior chamber depth readings and keratometry readings by immersion biometry and OCB was observed (reflected in a mean bias of −0.065 mm, −0.048 mm and +0.1803 D, respectively, in association with OCB). Agreement between the lens power recommended by each technique to achieve emmetropia was poor (mean bias of +1.16 D in association with OCB), but improved following appropriate modification of lens constants in the Accutome A-scan software (mean bias with OCB = −0.4 D). Study 3: 37 (92.5%) and 23 (57.5%) of operated eyes achieved a postoperative refraction within ±1 D and ±0.5 D of target, respectively. Conclusion: Systematic errors in biometry can exist, in the presence of acceptable postoperative refractive results. Dual biometry allows each biometric parameter to be scrutinized in isolation, and identify sources of error that may otherwise go undetected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The myopic eye is generally considered to be a vulnerable eye and, at levels greater than 6 D, one that is especially susceptible to a range of ocular pathologies. There is concern therefore that the prevalence of myopia in young adolescent eyes has increased substantially over recent decades and is now approaching 10−25% and 60−80%, respectively, in industrialized societies of the West and East. Whereas it is clear that the major structural correlate of myopia is longitudinal elongation of the posterior vitreous chamber, other potential correlates include profiles of lenticular and corneal power, the relationship between longitudinal and transverse vitreous chamber dimensions and ocular volume. The most potent predictors for juvenile-onset myopia continue to be a refractive error ≤+0.50 D at 5 years of age and family history. Significant and continuing progress is being made on the genetic characteristics of high myopia with at least four chromosomes currently identified. Twin studies and genetic modelling have computed a heritability index of at least 80% across the whole ametropic continuum. The high index does not, however, preclude an environmental precursor, sustained near work with high cognitive demand being the most likely. The significance of associations between accommodation, oculomotor dysfunction and human myopia is equivocal despite animal models that have demonstrated that sustained hyperopic defocus can induce vitreous chamber growth. Recent optical and pharmaceutical approaches to the reduction of myopia progression in children are likely precedents for future research, for example progressive addition spectacle lens trials and the use of the topical M1 muscarinic antagonist pirenzepine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]