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
. 2024 Aug;102(5):e696-e704.
doi: 10.1111/aos.16621. Epub 2023 Dec 28.

The effect of patient age on some new and older IOL power calculation formulas

Affiliations
Free article

The effect of patient age on some new and older IOL power calculation formulas

Ruti Sella et al. Acta Ophthalmol. 2024 Aug.
Free 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.

Keywords: IOL power calculation different ages; IOL power calculation in the elderly; IOL predictability; heteroscedastic statistical method; intraocular lens power calculation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

REFERENCES

    1. Abulafia, A., Barrett, G.D., Rotenberg, M., Kleinmann, G., Levy, A., Reitblat, O. et al. (2015) Intraocular lens power calculation for eyes with an axial length greater than 26.0 mm: comparison of formulas and methods. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 41, 548–556.
    1. Abulafia, A., Hill, W.E., Koch, D.D., Wang, L. & Barrett, G.D. (2016) Accuracy of the Barrett True‐K formula for intraocular lens power prediction after laser in situ keratomileusis or photorefractive keratectomy for myopia. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 42, 363–369.
    1. Assia, E.I., Apple, D.J., Morgan, R.C., Legler, U.F. & Brown, S.J. (1991) The relationship between the stretching capability of the anterior capsule and zonules. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 32, 2835–2839.
    1. Barrett, G.D. (1993) An improved universal theoretical formula for intraocular lens power prediction. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 19, 713–720.
    1. Behndig, A., Montan, P., Stenevi, U., Kugelberg, M. & Lundström, M. (2011) One million cataract surgeries: Swedish National Cataract Register 1992–2009. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, 37, 1539–1545.

LinkOut - more resources