Interocular Axial Length and Corneal Power Differences as Predictors of Postoperative Refractive Outcomes after Cataract Surgery
- PMID: 29459040
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.01.021
Interocular Axial Length and Corneal Power Differences as Predictors of Postoperative Refractive Outcomes after Cataract Surgery
Abstract
Purpose: To determine whether differences between eyes in axial length (AL) and corneal power (K) on optical biometry are predictive of refractive outcomes.
Design: Retrospective cohort study.
Participants: A total of 729 patients (1458 eyes) who underwent bilateral phacoemulsification at TLC (Mississauga, Ontario, Canada) from September 2013 to August 2015.
Methods: We compared the proportion of patients having >0.5 diopters (D) of refractive error from target stratified by interocular axial length differences (IALDs) and interocular K differences (IKDs) between eyes as measured by optical biometry (IOL-Master, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Oberkochen, Germany). Analysis was repeated for 0.25 D or 1.0 D targets and for patients with uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) >0.3 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) postoperatively.
Main outcome measures: Proportions, odds ratios (ORs), and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed using generalized estimating equations to account for within-patient correlation.
Results: Some 79.1% of eyes were ≤0.5 D of refractive target, 47.0% were ≤0.25 D, and 97.2% were ≤1.0 D. The OR of having a refractive outcome >0.5 D from target for IALD cutoff of 0.2 mm was 1.4 (1.1-1.8), of 0.3 mm was 1.6 (1.2-2.1), and of 0.4 mm was 1.8 (1.3-2.5). This translates to 70.0% (63.5-75.7) within target for IALD of ≥0.4 mm versus 80.7% (78.4-82.9) for <0.4 mm. For a given patient with IALD, the chance of being off target was similar for the shorter and longer eye. Eyes outside of target were twice as likely to be <-0.5 D than >0.5 D. Interocular K difference was largely not associated with prediction error, yet larger IKD-flat, steep, and average were associated with increased odds of UCVA >0.3 logMAR postoperatively.
Conclusions: Interocular axial length difference of as little as ≥0.2 mm is associated with a higher chance of >0.5 D of refractive error from target and worse UCVA. Interocular K difference was not associated with worse refractive error from target, although a difference of ≥0.4 D was associated with worse UCVA. These cutoffs should be considered in preoperative planning and discussion with patients. Future study is required to assess whether repeating measurements, using adjunctive measurement devices, or attempting to separate true differences from artifact based on preoperative refractive characteristics reduces residual refractive error.
Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Predicting Refractive Success in the Age of More Precise Measurements.Ophthalmology. 2018 Jul;125(7):982-983. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.03.031. Ophthalmology. 2018. PMID: 29935670 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Interocular optical biometry differences as predictors of postoperative cataract surgery refractive outcomes: A retrospective cohort study.Med J Malaysia. 2021 Nov;76(6):884-892. Med J Malaysia. 2021. PMID: 34806678
-
Comparison of intraocular lens power calculation by the IOLMaster in phakic and eyes with hydrophobic acrylic lenses.Ophthalmology. 2009 Jul;116(7):1336-42. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.01.035. Epub 2009 May 8. Ophthalmology. 2009. PMID: 19427697
-
Refractive outcomes in nanophthalmic eyes after phacoemulsification and implantation of a high-refractive-power foldable intraocular lens.J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015 Nov;41(11):2394-402. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.05.033. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2015. PMID: 26703488
-
Correlations between ocular biometrics and refractive error: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta Ophthalmol. 2019 Dec;97(8):735-743. doi: 10.1111/aos.14208. Epub 2019 Aug 6. Acta Ophthalmol. 2019. PMID: 31386806
-
Refractive enhancements for residual refractive error after cataract surgery.Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2021 Jan;32(1):54-61. doi: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000717. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2021. PMID: 33122488 Review.
Cited by
-
Comparison of 2 modern swept-source optical biometers-IOLMaster 700 and Anterion.Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2023 Apr;261(4):999-1010. doi: 10.1007/s00417-022-05870-9. Epub 2022 Oct 29. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2023. PMID: 36307658 Free PMC article.
-
Inter-ocular and inter-visit differences in ocular biometry and refractive outcomes after cataract surgery.Sci Rep. 2020 Sep 7;10(1):14673. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-71545-2. Sci Rep. 2020. PMID: 32895416 Free PMC article.
-
Similarity of eyes in a cataractous population-How reliable is the biometry of the fellow eye for lens power calculation?PLoS One. 2022 Jun 30;17(6):e0269709. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269709. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 35771869 Free PMC article.
-
Accuracy of biometric formulae for intraocular lens power calculation in a teaching hospital.Int J Ophthalmol. 2020 Jan 18;13(1):61-65. doi: 10.18240/ijo.2020.01.09. eCollection 2020. Int J Ophthalmol. 2020. PMID: 31956571 Free PMC article.
-
Changes in Corneal Higher-Order Aberrations and Ocular Biometric Measurements after Phacoemulsification Combined with Goniosynechialysis in Primary Angle Closure/Glaucoma Patients.J Ophthalmol. 2024 Jan 12;2024:5833543. doi: 10.1155/2024/5833543. eCollection 2024. J Ophthalmol. 2024. PMID: 38250183 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical