Search

Purpose: To explore the accuracy of the improved SRK/T-Li formula in eyes following implantation of intraocular lens (IOL) of less than 10 D as calculated by using the SRK/T formula in Chinese. Methods: A total of 489 eyes from 489 patients with cataracts were included in this study. These patients were divided into a training set (271 patients) and a testing set (218 patients). The IOL power calculated by using SRK/T was less than 10 D. We evaluated the accuracy of the modified SRK/T-Li formula (P = PSRK/T × 0.8 + 2 (P = implanted IOL power; PSRK/T = IOL power calculated by SRK/T)). We evaluated the mean absolute error (MAE), percentage of prediction error (PE) within ± 0.25, ± 0.50, and ± 1.00 D, and the percentage of postoperative hyperopia. Results: The MAE values in order of lowest to highest were as follows: 0.412 D (SRK/T-Li), 0.414 D (Barrett Universal II, (BUII)), 0.814 D (SRK/T), and 1.039 D (Holladay 1). The percentage of PE within ± 0.25 D, ± 0.50 D, and ± 1.00 D was 38.99%, 69.27% and 92.66% (BUII), 40.83%, 69.27% and 94.04% (SRK/T-Li), 20.64%, 41.28% and 71.56% (SRK/T), and 7.34%, 16.51% and 53.21% (Holladay 1), respectively. SRK/T-Li had the smallest postoperative hyperopic shift. Conclusions: For Chinese patients with an IOL power of less than 10 D as calculated by using the SRK/T, the SRK/T-Li has good accuracy and is the best choice to reduce postoperative hyperopic shift. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To compare the accuracy of 14 formulas in calculating intraocular lens (IOL) power in extremely long eyes with axial length (AL) over 30.0 mm.In this retrospective study, 211 eyes (211 patients) with ALs > 30.0 mm were successfully treated with cataract surgery without complications. Ocular biometric parameters were obtained from IOLMaster 700. Fourteen formulas were evaluated using the optimized A constants: Barrett Universal II (BUII), Kane, Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) 2.0, PEARL-DGS, T2, SRK/T, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Haigis and Wang-Koch AL adjusted formulas (SRK/Tmodified-W/K, Holladay 1modified-W/K, Holladay 1NP-modified-W/K, Holladay 2modified-W/K, Holladay 2NP-modified-W/K). The mean prediction error (PE) and standard deviation (SD), mean absolute errors (MAE), median absolute errors (MedAE), and the percentage of prediction errors (PEs) within ± 0.25 D, ± 0.50 D, ± 1.00 D were analyzed.The Kane formula had the smallest MAE (0.43 D) and MedAE (0.34 D). The highest percentage of PE within ± 0.25 D was for EVO 2.0 (37.91%) and the Holladay 1NP-modified-W/K formulas (37.91%). The Kane formula had the highest percentage of PEs in the range of ± 0.50, ± 0.75, ± 1.00, and ± 2.00 D. There was no significant difference in PEs within ± 0.25, ± 0.50 ± 0.75 and ± 1.00 D between BUII, Kane, EVO 2.0 and Wang-Koch AL adjusted formulas (P > .05) by using Cochran’s Q test. The Holladay 2modified-W/K formula has the lowest percentage of hyperopic outcomes (29.38%).The BUII, Kane, EVO 2.0 and Wang-Koch AL adjusted formulas have comparable accuracy for IOL power calculation in eyes with ALs > 30.0 mm.Methods: To compare the accuracy of 14 formulas in calculating intraocular lens (IOL) power in extremely long eyes with axial length (AL) over 30.0 mm.In this retrospective study, 211 eyes (211 patients) with ALs > 30.0 mm were successfully treated with cataract surgery without complications. Ocular biometric parameters were obtained from IOLMaster 700. Fourteen formulas were evaluated using the optimized A constants: Barrett Universal II (BUII), Kane, Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) 2.0, PEARL-DGS, T2, SRK/T, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Haigis and Wang-Koch AL adjusted formulas (SRK/Tmodified-W/K, Holladay 1modified-W/K, Holladay 1NP-modified-W/K, Holladay 2modified-W/K, Holladay 2NP-modified-W/K). The mean prediction error (PE) and standard deviation (SD), mean absolute errors (MAE), median absolute errors (MedAE), and the percentage of prediction errors (PEs) within ± 0.25 D, ± 0.50 D, ± 1.00 D were analyzed.The Kane formula had the smallest MAE (0.43 D) and MedAE (0.34 D). The highest percentage of PE within ± 0.25 D was for EVO 2.0 (37.91%) and the Holladay 1NP-modified-W/K formulas (37.91%). The Kane formula had the highest percentage of PEs in the range of ± 0.50, ± 0.75, ± 1.00, and ± 2.00 D. There was no significant difference in PEs within ± 0.25, ± 0.50 ± 0.75 and ± 1.00 D between BUII, Kane, EVO 2.0 and Wang-Koch AL adjusted formulas (P > .05) by using Cochran’s Q test. The Holladay 2modified-W/K formula has the lowest percentage of hyperopic outcomes (29.38%).The BUII, Kane, EVO 2.0 and Wang-Koch AL adjusted formulas have comparable accuracy for IOL power calculation in eyes with ALs > 30.0 mm.Results: To compare the accuracy of 14 formulas in calculating intraocular lens (IOL) power in extremely long eyes with axial length (AL) over 30.0 mm.In this retrospective study, 211 eyes (211 patients) with ALs > 30.0 mm were successfully treated with cataract surgery without complications. Ocular biometric parameters were obtained from IOLMaster 700. Fourteen formulas were evaluated using the optimized A constants: Barrett Universal II (BUII), Kane, Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) 2.0, PEARL-DGS, T2, SRK/T, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Haigis and Wang-Koch AL adjusted formulas (SRK/Tmodified-W/K, Holladay 1modified-W/K, Holladay 1NP-modified-W/K, Holladay 2modified-W/K, Holladay 2NP-modified-W/K). The mean prediction error (PE) and standard deviation (SD), mean absolute errors (MAE), median absolute errors (MedAE), and the percentage of prediction errors (PEs) within ± 0.25 D, ± 0.50 D, ± 1.00 D were analyzed.The Kane formula had the smallest MAE (0.43 D) and MedAE (0.34 D). The highest percentage of PE within ± 0.25 D was for EVO 2.0 (37.91%) and the Holladay 1NP-modified-W/K formulas (37.91%). The Kane formula had the highest percentage of PEs in the range of ± 0.50, ± 0.75, ± 1.00, and ± 2.00 D. There was no significant difference in PEs within ± 0.25, ± 0.50 ± 0.75 and ± 1.00 D between BUII, Kane, EVO 2.0 and Wang-Koch AL adjusted formulas (P > .05) by using Cochran’s Q test. The Holladay 2modified-W/K formula has the lowest percentage of hyperopic outcomes (29.38%).The BUII, Kane, EVO 2.0 and Wang-Koch AL adjusted formulas have comparable accuracy for IOL power calculation in eyes with ALs > 30.0 mm.Conclusions: To compare the accuracy of 14 formulas in calculating intraocular lens (IOL) power in extremely long eyes with axial length (AL) over 30.0 mm.In this retrospective study, 211 eyes (211 patients) with ALs > 30.0 mm were successfully treated with cataract surgery without complications. Ocular biometric parameters were obtained from IOLMaster 700. Fourteen formulas were evaluated using the optimized A constants: Barrett Universal II (BUII), Kane, Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) 2.0, PEARL-DGS, T2, SRK/T, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Haigis and Wang-Koch AL adjusted formulas (SRK/Tmodified-W/K, Holladay 1modified-W/K, Holladay 1NP-modified-W/K, Holladay 2modified-W/K, Holladay 2NP-modified-W/K). The mean prediction error (PE) and standard deviation (SD), mean absolute errors (MAE), median absolute errors (MedAE), and the percentage of prediction errors (PEs) within ± 0.25 D, ± 0.50 D, ± 1.00 D were analyzed.The Kane formula had the smallest MAE (0.43 D) and MedAE (0.34 D). The highest percentage of PE within ± 0.25 D was for EVO 2.0 (37.91%) and the Holladay 1NP-modified-W/K formulas (37.91%). The Kane formula had the highest percentage of PEs in the range of ± 0.50, ± 0.75, ± 1.00, and ± 2.00 D. There was no significant difference in PEs within ± 0.25, ± 0.50 ± 0.75 and ± 1.00 D between BUII, Kane, EVO 2.0 and Wang-Koch AL adjusted formulas (P > .05) by using Cochran’s Q test. The Holladay 2modified-W/K formula has the lowest percentage of hyperopic outcomes (29.38%).The BUII, Kane, EVO 2.0 and Wang-Koch AL adjusted formulas have comparable accuracy for IOL power calculation in eyes with ALs > 30.0 mm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]