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
Comparative Study
. 2020 Jan;46(1):27-33.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2019.08.044.

Comparison of formula accuracy for intraocular lens power calculation based on measurements by a swept-source optical coherence tomography optical biometer

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of formula accuracy for intraocular lens power calculation based on measurements by a swept-source optical coherence tomography optical biometer

Giacomo Savini et al. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2020 Jan.

Abstract

Purpose: To analyze the results of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation using measurements by a swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) optical biometer.

Setting: IRCCS G.B. Bietti Foundation, Rome, Italy.

Design: Evaluation of a diagnostic test instrument.

Methods: Preoperative measurements by the OA-2000 (Tomey Inc.) were taken in a consecutive series of patients undergoing cataract surgery with one IOL model (AcrySof SN60WF; Alcon Laboratories, Inc.). Measurements were entered into the following formulas: Barrett Universal II, Emmetropia Verifying Optical (EVO), Haigis, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Holladay 2, Holladay 2 with axial length adjustment, Kane, Olsen, Panacea, SRK/T, T2, and VRF. When refraction was measured at 1 month postoperatively, the mean arithmetic prediction error, the median absolute error (MedAE), and the percentage of eyes with a error of ±0.50 D or less were calculated after constant optimization.

Results: We enrolled 150 eyes. All formulas yielded excellent outcomes. The MedAE ranged between 0.200 D and 0.259 D, with a statistically significant difference among formulas (P = .0004). The lowest MedAE values were obtained with the Barrett, EVO, Kane, Olsenstandalone, Radial Basis Function (RBF), and T2 formulas. The percentage of eyes with a prediction error of ±0.50 D or less ranged between 80.00% and 90.67%, with a statistically significant difference (P < .0001). The Barrett, EVO, Holladay 2 with axial length adjustment, Kane, RBF, and T2 achieved the highest percentages (≥88%).

Conclusions: Measurements provided by the SS-OCT optical biometer enable accurate IOL power calculation because all formulas yielded a prediction error within 0.50 D in at least 80% of eyes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources