Back to Search Start Over

Comparison of intraocular lens power prediction using immersion ultrasound and optical biometry with and without formula optimization

Authors :
Attila Nagy
Gabor Nemeth
András Berta
László Módis
Source :
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology. 250:1321-1325
Publication Year :
2012
Publisher :
Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2012.

Abstract

Comparison of postoperative refraction results using ultrasound biometry with closed immersion shell and optical biometry. Three hundred and sixty-four eyes of 306 patients (age: 70.6 ± 12.8 years) underwent cataract surgery where intraocular lenses calculated by SRK/T formula were implanted. In 159 cases immersion ultrasonic biometry, in 205 eyes optical biometry was used. Differences between predicted and actual postoperative refractions were calculated both prior to and after optimization with the SRK/T formula, after which we analysed the similar data in the case of Holladay, Haigis, and Hoffer-Q formulas. Mean absolute error (MAE) and the percentage rate of patients within ±0.5 and ±1.0 D difference in the predicted error were calculated with these four formulas. MAE was 0.5–0.7 D in cases of both methods with SRK/T, Holladay, and Hoffer-Q formula, but higher with Haigis formula. With no optimization, 60–65 % of the patients were under 0.5 D error in the immersion group (except for Haigis formula). Using the optical method, this value was slightly higher (62-67 %), however, in this case, Haigis formula also did not perform so well (45 %). Refraction results significantly improved with Holladay, Hoffer-Q, and Haigis formulas in both groups. The rate of patients under 0.5 D error increased to 65 % by the immersion technique, and up to 80 % by the optical one. According to our results, optical biometry offers only slightly better outcomes compared to those of immersion shell with no optimized formulas. However, in case of new generation formulas with both methods, the optimization of IOL-constants give significantly better results.

Details

ISSN :
1435702X and 0721832X
Volume :
250
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....4cdb21a3a849e3f5f91d5e9162f54b30
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-012-2013-9