AI Article Synopsis
- The study evaluated the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations during cataract surgery in patients aged 60 and older, analyzing data from 421 eyes across different age brackets.
- Significant differences in predictability rates were found, with the oldest age group showing lower accuracy for specific IOL formulas like EVO 2.0, Kane, and SRK/T compared to younger groups.
- The findings suggest that IOL power calculation formulas may work differently across age groups, indicating a need for tailored approaches in cataract surgery to enhance visual outcomes.
Article Abstract
Purpose: To assess the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation in different age groups using various IOL calculation formulas.
Methods: Data from 421 eyes of 421 patients ≥60 years old (ages: 60-69, n = 131; 70-74, n = 105; 75-84, n = 158 and ≥85, n = 27), who underwent uneventful cataract surgery with SN60WF IOL implantation at John A. Moran Eye Center, Salt Lake City, USA, were retrospectively obtained. The SD of the prediction error (PE), median and mean absolute PEs and the percentage of eyes within ±0.25, ±0.50, ±0.75 and ±1.00 D were calculated after constant optimizations for the following formulas: Barrett Universal II (BUII), Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO) 2.0, Haigis, Hoffer Q, Hoffer QST, Holladay 1, Kane, Radial Basis Function (RBF) 3.0 and SRK/T. Results were compared between the different age groups.
Results: Predictability rates within 0.25D were lower for the eldest age group compared with the other groups using the EVO 2.0 (33% vs. 37%-53%, p = 0.045), Kane (26% vs. 35%-50%, p = 0.034) and SRK/T (22% vs. 31%-49%, p = 0.002). Higher median absolute refractive errors for all formulas were observed in the oldest group [range: 0.39 D (Haigis, Hoffer QSR)-0.48 D (Kane)], followed by the youngest group [range: 0.30 D (RBF 3.0)-0.39 D (Holladay 1, SRK/T)] but did not reach statistical significance. No significant differences between the groups in the distribution parameter were seen.
Conclusion: Current IOL power calculation formulas may have variable accuracy for different age groups. This should be taken into account when planning cataract surgery to improve refractive outcomes.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/aos.16621 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Refractive Prediction Accuracy Using Intraoperative Aberrometry versus Barrett True-K Formula Following Corneal Refractive Surgery.
Clin Ophthalmol
December 2024
Alcon Vision LLC, Fort Worth, TX, USA.
Purpose: To compare the refractive prediction accuracy of the Optiwave Refractive Analysis (ORA) SYSTEM with the Barrett True-K (BTK) formula in calculating intraocular lens (IOL) power in eyes that underwent cataract surgery after previous myopic photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) or laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).
Methods: This retrospective study evaluated patients aged ≥22 years with prior myopic PRK or LASIK who underwent unilateral or bilateral cataract removal and monofocal IOL implantation using the ORA SYSTEM at 177 sites in the United States. Two datasets were analyzed: All Eyes (ie, all eligible eyes) and First Surgery Eyes (ie, each patient's first implanted eye).
Comparison of Optical Biometry Data Measured with Lenstar and Anterion Devices.
Cesk Slov Oftalmol
December 2024
Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the results of preoperative biometric data measured with optical biometers of different generations in patients with cataract. Lenstar optical biometry is based on the principle of optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR), and Anterion on swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT).
Material And Methods: A total of 200 eyes (103 patients) were included in a prospective study at the Faculty Hospital in Trenčín the period from June 2023 to January 2024.
Evaluation of prediction errors in nine intraocular lens calculation formulas using an explainable machine learning model.
BMC Ophthalmol
December 2024
Department of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Korea.
Background: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the relationship between prediction errors (PEs) and ocular biometric variables in cataract surgery using nine intraocular lens (IOL) formulas with an explainable machine learning model.
Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of consecutive patients who underwent standard cataract surgery with a Tecnis 1-piece IOL (ZCB00) at a single center. We calculated predicted refraction using the following IOL formulas: Barrett Universal II (BUII), Cooke K6, EVO V2.
Refractive change at 5 years in the Toddler Aphakia and Pseudophakia Study (TAPS).
Ophthalmology
December 2024
Department of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Neurosciences, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota, MN;. Electronic address:
Article Synopsis
- The study focuses on refractive changes observed in children aged 5 years who underwent cataract surgery with intraocular lens placement before age 2.
- It analyzed data from 96 children, comparing results between unilateral and bilateral cataract cases, as well as those operated on at different ages (1 to <7 months vs. 7-24 months).
- The findings indicated that children operated on between 1 to <7 months experienced significantly more refractive change compared to those operated on later, suggesting careful consideration is needed when selecting lens power and target refraction for younger patients.
Fluctuations of Anterior Chamber Depth and Astigmatism in Pseudophakic Eyes.
Clin Ophthalmol
December 2024
Department of Refractive Surgery, Eye Clinic Sistina Oftalmologija, Skopje, 1000 Republic of North Macedonia.
Purpose: To explore the significance of changes in anterior chamber depth (ΔACD) and astigmatism between 4 and 8 weeks following uneventful phacoemulsification.
Patients And Methods: Anterior chamber depth (ACD, mm), autorefractometry and subjective refraction were monitored in pseudophakic eyes implanted with non-toric IOLs (group 1, SA60AT, n=36; group 2, SN60WF, n=34; group 3, ICBOO, n=16) and phakic control group (n=30, group 4a, for ACD and autorefractometry) over four weeks. Changes in subjective refractions were compared with repeatability in normal phakic eyes (n=30, group 4b).
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!