Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Apr 8;17(1):44.
doi: 10.1186/s12886-017-0439-x.

Prediction accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation methods after laser refractive surgery

Yubo Wu  1 , Songyu Liu  2 , Rongfeng Liao  3
Affiliations

Prediction accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation methods after laser refractive surgery

Yubo Wu et al. BMC Ophthalmol. .

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the prediction accuracy of postoperative refractions using partial coherence interferometry (IOL-Master) and applanation ultrasound (AL-3000) assisted with corneal topography (TMS-4) in eyes that had undergone myopic laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK).

Methods: Haigis-L formula, Koch-Maloney method using Haigis formula, Shammas clinically derived K-value (simulated keratometric value) correction (Shammas c.d.) using Haigis formula, and Shammas post-LASIK (Shammas-PL) formula were used in eyes with myopic LASIK. Constants were derived from the optimized constants in 133 virgin eyes. Refractive outcomes were determined by streak retinoscopy and subjective manifest refraction. Methods and formulas were evaluated by mean error (ME), standard deviation (SD), range of error, mean absolute error (MAE), median absolute error, 95% confidence interval of MAE, and percentage of eyes within ±0.5 diopter (D), ±1.0 D, and ±1.5 D of prediction.

Results: SDs of the Haigis-L, Koch-Maloney method using the Haigis formula, Shammas c.d. using the Haigis formula, and the Shammas-PL formula using IOL-Master were 0.721, 0.695, 0.695, and 0.698; and those using AL-3000 assisted with TMS-4 were 0.782, 0.741, 0.743, and 0.778, respectively.

Conclusions: No-history methods that corrected corneal power with measurements using IOL-Master were promising in myopic post-LASIK eyes, but still a gap in prediction accuracy exists between virgin eyes and post-LASIK eyes.

Keywords: Biometry; Cataract surgery; Intraocular lens power calculation; Lasik.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Box plot of prediction errors for each method. Green color represents measurements from IOL-Master. Yellow color represents measurements from AL-3000 and TMS-4
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Sarwar H, Modi N. Sir Harold Ridley: innovator of cataract surgery. J Perioper Pract. 2014;24:210–212. - PubMed
    1. Nemeth J, Fekete O, Pesztenlehrer N. Optical and ultrasound measurement of axial length and anterior chamber depth for intraocular lens power calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003;29:85–88. doi: 10.1016/S0886-3350(02)01500-6. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rajan MS, Keilhorn I, Bell JA. Partial coherence laser interferometry vs conventional ultrasound biometry in intraocular lens power calculations. Eye (Lond) 2002;16:552–556. doi: 10.1038/sj.eye.6700157. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Olsen T, Nielsen PJ. Immersion versus contact technique in the measurement of axial length by ultrasound. Acta Ophthalmol. 1989;67:101–102. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.1989.tb00732.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Masket S, Masket SE. Simple regression formula for intraocular lens power adjustment in eyes requiring cataract surgery after excimer laser photoablation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006;32:430–434. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2005.12.106. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources