The effect of ocular biometric factors on the accuracy of various IOL power calculation formulas

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background

To evaluate how differences in ocular biometry affects the Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, SRK/T, and Haigis intraocular lens power calculation formulae predictions.

Methods

This study was performed on 91 eyes of 91 patients who underwent uneventful cataract surgery. Ocular biometry values were measured using the IOL Master 500, and intraocular lens (IOL) power was calculated using the Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, and SRK/T formulas. We calculated the expected difference (ED) of each 3rd generation formula from the Haigis formula by subtracting the predicted refraction of the Haigis formula from the predicted refraction of each 3rd generation formula. Post-operative anterior chamber depth (ACD) was measured at 1 month after surgery using the IOL master. We calculated errors of each formula by subtracting predicted from manifest refraction at post-operative 1 month. Correlation analysis was performed between ocular biometry values, formula expectation values, formula errors and absolute formula errors.

Results

Multiple regression analysis revealed that preoperative ACD was the only significant factor for ED prediction in all of the 3rd generation formulas. For mean errors, axial length and post-operative 1-month change of ACD (delta ACD) correlated significantly with the errors in all 3rd generation formulas, but not with errors of the Haigis formula. Median absolute error (MedAE) of the formulas were 0.40 D for the Hoffer Q formula, 0.37 D for the Holladay formula, 0.34 D for the SRK/T formula, and 0.41 D for the Haigis formula. The MAE of the formulas were 0.50 ± 0.47 D for the Hoffer Q formula, 0.50 ± 0.50 D for the Holladay formula, 0.47 ± 0.51 D for the SRK/T formula, and 0.50 ± 0.47 D for the Haigis formula.

Conclusion

Regarding ED between the third generation and Haigis formulas, preoperative ACD demonstrated the greatest influence. Calculating mean absolute errors of the formulas, all IOL formulas showed excellent and comparable accuracy. Post-operative change (delta) of ACD correlated significantly with errors of third generation formulas according to simulated ACD.

Related collections

Most cited references 17

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Comparison of immersion ultrasound biometry and partial coherence interferometry for intraocular lens calculation according to Haigis.

W Haigis, B. Schneider, B Lege … (2000)

The precision of intraocular lens (IOL) calculation is essentially determined by the accuracy of the measurement of axial length. In addition to classical ultrasound biometry, partial coherence interferometry serves as a new optical method for axial length determination. A functional prototype from Carl Zeiss Jena implementing this principle was compared with immersion ultrasound biometry in our laboratory. In 108 patients attending the biometry laboratory for planning of cataract surgery, axial lengths were additionally measured optically. Whereas surgical decisions were based on ultrasound data, we used postoperative refraction measurements to calculate retrospectively what results would have been obtained if optical axial length data had been used for IOL calculation. For the translation of optical to geometrical lengths, five different conversion formulas were used, among them the relation which is built into the Zeiss IOL-Master. IOL calculation was carried out according to Haigis with and without optimization of constants. On the basis of ultrasound immersion data from our Grieshaber Biometric System (GBS), postoperative refraction after implantation of a Rayner IOL type 755 U was predicted correctly within +/- 1 D in 85.7% and within +/- 2 D in 99% of all cases. An analogous result was achieved with optical axial length data after suitable transformation of optical path lengths into geometrical distances. Partial coherence interferometry is a noncontact, user- and patient-friendly method for axial length determination and IOL planning with an accuracy comparable to that of high-precision immersion ultrasound.

0 comments Cited 141 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The Hoffer Q formula: a comparison of theoretic and regression formulas.

Barry Hoffer (1993)

A new formula, the Hoffer Q, was developed to predict the pseudophakic anterior chamber depth (ACD) for theoretic intraocular lens (IOL) power formulas. It relies on a personalized ACD, axial length, and corneal curvature. In 180 eyes, the Q formula proved more accurate than those using a constant ACD (P < .0001) and equal (P = .63) to those using the actual postoperative measured ACD (which is not possible clinically). In 450 eyes of one style IOL implanted by one surgeon, the Hoffer Q formula was equal to the Holladay (P = .65) and SRK/T (P = .63) and more accurate than the SRK (P < .0001) and SRK II (P = .004) regression formulas using optimized personalization constants. The Hoffer Q formula may be clinically more accurate than the Holladay and SRK/T formulas in eyes shorter than 22.0 mm. Even the original nonpersonalized constant ACD Hoffer formula compared with SRK I (using the most valid possible optimized personal A-constant) has a better mean absolute error (0.56 versus 0.59) and a significantly better range of IOL prediction error (3.44 diopters [D] versus 7.31 D). The range of error of the Hoffer Q formula (3.59 D) was half that of SRK I (7.31 D). The highest IOL power errors in the 450 eyes were in the SRK II (3.14 D) and SRK I (6.14 D); the power error was 2.08 D using the Hoffer Q formula. The series using overall personalized ACD was more accurate than using an axial length subgroup personalized ACD in each axial length subgroup. The results strongly support replacing regression formulas with third-generation personalized theoretic formulas and carefully evaluating the Holladay, SRK/T, and Hoffer Q formulas.

0 comments Cited 114 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Protocols for studies of intraocular lens formula accuracy.

Kenneth Hoffer, Jaime Aramberri, Wolfgang Haigis … (2015)

0 comments Cited 83 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Jinho Jeong: amario@naver.com

Han Song: honey9012@naver.com

Jimmy K. Lee: jimmylee@montefiore.org

Roy S. Chuck: RCHUCK@montefiore.org

Ji-Won Kwon: (+82) 31-810-6250 , eyeminerva@naver.com

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMC Ophthalmol

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): BMC Ophthalmol

Title: BMC Ophthalmology

Publisher: BioMed Central (London )

ISSN (Electronic): 1471-2415

Publication date (Electronic): 2 May 2017

Publication date PMC-release: 2 May 2017

Publication date Collection: 2017

Volume: 17

Electronic Location Identifier: 62

Affiliations

[1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0725 5207, GRID grid.411277.6, Department of Ophthalmology, , Jeju National University College of Medicine, ; Jeju, Korea

[2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0475 0976, GRID grid.416355.0, Department of Ophthalmology, , Myongji Hospital Seonam University College of Medicine, ; 697-24, Hwajung-Dong, Deokyang-Gu, Goyang-Si, Gyeonggi-Do 412-270 Korea

[3 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2152 0791, GRID grid.240283.f, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Montefiore Medical Center, , Albert Einstein College of Medicine, ; New York, USA

Article

Publisher ID: 454

DOI: 10.1186/s12886-017-0454-y

PMC ID: 5414130

PubMed ID: 28464806

SO-VID: 6cd37e7b-e193-4530-b53f-5175fa590140

License:

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.