EVALUATION OF THE KERATOMETRIC, BIOMETRIC DATA AND THE BIOMETRIC DEPENDENCIES AS RISK FACTORS OF REFRACTIVE ERROR IN IOL POWER CALCULATION

https://www.journal-imab-bg.org 2733 ABSTRACT Purpose: The aim of the study is to evaluate the keratometric and biometric data and the biometric dependencies as risk factors of absolute refractive error (AE) in IOL power calculation of monofocal lenses in cataract patients using immersion ultrasound biometry (US-BM) and third generation formulas SRK-T, Holl-1, Hoff-Q. Methods: We present a retrospective, case-control study. Two hundred and fifteen eyes of 158 patients with cataract are included that underwent uncomplicated phacoemulsification with implantation of monofocal IOL. Automated keratometry (Potec 700), immersion ultrasound biometry (US-BM) and third generation formulas-SRK-T, Holladay-1, Hoffer-Q were used. Correlation analysis was performed between ocular keratometry and biometry values and the absolute error. Results: The predicted postoperative refraction (SE) in 137 eyes (63.7%) was successfully achieved with AE ± 0.50D. On the second visit after phacoemulsification (1-st month), 133 eyes (61.9%) had uncorrected distant visual acuity UCDVA ≥0.8. In our study was found that the keratometry procedure (KER) and surgically-induced astigmatism (SIA) were not sources of refractive error. Groups with larger relative shares of AE> ± 0.50D are with cylinder value prior to phacoemulsification (befCylD) > -0.75D, longer axial lenght (AL > 26.00 mm), shallower anterior chamber (ACD < 2.6 mm), smaller anterior segment (ACD + LT) <6.6 mm), smaller ratio of the anterior segment to the axial length (ACD+ LT / AL < 0.30). A methodology for estimating the expected AE has been proposed. Conclusion: The expected AE can be predicted via two preoperative factors: befCylD and the ratio of the anterior segment to the axial length (ACD + LT)/AL.

[1]  R. Wei,et al.  Clinical evaluation of surgery-induced astigmatism in cataract surgery using 2.2 mm or 1.8 mm clear corneal micro-incisions. , 2017, International Journal of Ophthalmology.

[2]  Jonathan E. Moore,et al.  Investigating the impact of preoperative corneal astigmatism orientation on the postoperative spherical equivalent refraction following intraocular lens implantation , 2018, Eye and Vision.

[3]  M. Eliaçık,et al.  Predicting the refractive outcome and accuracy of IOL power calculation after phacoemulsification using the SRK/T formula with ultrasound biometry in medium axial lengths , 2017, Clinical ophthalmology.

[4]  Sverker Norrby,et al.  Sources of error in intraocular lens power calculation , 2008, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[5]  J. Alió,et al.  Surgical options for correction of refractive error following cataract surgery , 2014, Eye and Vision.

[6]  R. Chuck,et al.  The effect of ocular biometric factors on the accuracy of various IOL power calculation formulas , 2017, BMC Ophthalmology.

[7]  R. Sheard Optimising biometry for best outcomes in cataract surgery , 2014, Eye.

[8]  D. Cooke,et al.  Comparison of 9 intraocular lens power calculation formulas , 2016, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[9]  W. Haigis,et al.  Laser interference biometry versus ultrasound biometry in certain clinical conditions , 2004, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[10]  T. Olsen,et al.  Accuracy of the newer generation intraocular lens power calculation formulas in long and short eyes , 1991, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[11]  M. Eliaçık,et al.  Performance of the SRK/T formula using A-Scan ultrasound biometry after phacoemulsification in eyes with short and long axial lengths , 2016, BMC Ophthalmology.

[12]  N. Congdon,et al.  Prevalence of corneal astigmatism before cataract surgery in Chinese patients , 2013, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[13]  T. Olsen,et al.  Calculation of intraocular lens power: a review. , 2007, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

[14]  C. Joo,et al.  Effect of anterior chamber depth on the choice of intraocular lens calculation formula , 2017, PloS one.

[15]  C K Hitzenberger,et al.  Improved prediction of intraocular lens power using partial coherence interferometry , 2001, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[16]  Zhuoling Lin,et al.  Distribution of axial length, anterior chamber depth, and corneal curvature in an aged population in South China , 2016, BMC Ophthalmology.

[17]  N. Zhang,et al.  Comparison of immersion ultrasound and low coherence reflectometry for ocular biometry in cataract patients. , 2018, International journal of ophthalmology.

[18]  M. McKibbin,et al.  Benchmark standards for refractive outcomes after NHS cataract surgery , 2009, Eye.

[19]  D. Koch,et al.  Intraocular lens power calculation for eyes with an axial length greater than 26.0 mm: Comparison of formulas and methods , 2015, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[20]  Mohammad I. Khan,et al.  Prevalence of corneal astigmatism in patients having routine cataract surgery at a teaching hospital in the United Kingdom , 2011, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.