Journal List > J Korean Ophthalmol Soc > v.57(12) > 1010477

TOOLS
Kang, Moon, and Jun: Accuracy of Three Intraocular Lens-power Formulas in Predicting Refractive Outcomes in Different Intraocular Lenses
Original Article

J Korean Ophthalmol Soc 2016;57(12):1891-1896.

Published online: 25 September 2016

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2016.57.12.1891

Accuracy of Three Intraocular Lens-power Formulas in Predicting Refractive Outcomes in Different Intraocular Lenses

Sung Il Kang, MD1, Kun Moon, MD2, Jong Hwa Jun, MD, PhD1

1Department of Ophthalmology, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea

2Gang-Nam the Bright Eye Clinic, Seoul, Korea

Address reprint requests to Jong Hwa Jun, MD, PhD Department of Ophthalmology, Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center, #56 Dalseong-ro, Jung-gu, Daegu 41931, Korea Tel: 82-53-250-7702, Fax: 82-53-250-7705 E-mail: junjonghwa@gmail.com

Received 21 July 2016       Revised 16 September 2016       Accepted 21 November 2016

Copyright © 2016 Korean Ophthalmological Society

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the accuracy of different power-calculation formulas in predicting the postoperative refraction of three-piece and one-piece intraocular lenses (IOL).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 74 eyes (62 patients) that had undergone cataract surgery involving implantation of one of two IOLs― the SENSAR® AAB00 1-Piece Acrylic IOL (44 eyes), or the Hoya® VA60BB 3-Piece Acrylic IOL (30 eyes)― between October 2014 and March 2015. Axial length was measured using an optical low-coherence refrac-tometry (Lenstar®), and biometry was then calculated by the pre-installed Lenstar program, which used the SRK/II, Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraff/Theoretical (SRK/T), and Hoffer Q formulas. Mean absolute error (MAE) and mean numeric error (MNE) were measured 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, and 2 months after surgery.

Results

Using the SRK/T and Hoffer Q formulas, the one-piece IOL group differed significantly from the three-piece IOL group in terms of the MNE obtained 1 month and 2 months after surgery. Across all formulas and time points, there were no significant differences between the groups in terms of MAE.

Conclusions

There was no significant difference between the different power-calculation formulas. Starting 1 month after surgery, the three-piece IOL group showed myopic postoperative refraction compared to the predictive spherical equivalent using the SRK/T and Hoffer Q formulas.

Keywords: Intraocular lenses, Intraocular lens power formula, Mean absolute error, Mean numeric error

References

1. Holladay JT, Moran JR, Kezirian GM. Analysis of aggregate abdominally induced refractive change, prediction error, and intraocular astigmatism. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001; 27:61–79.
2. Olsen T. Prediction of the effective postoperative (intraocular lens) anterior chamber depth. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2006; 32:419–24.
crossref
3. Norrby S. Sources of error in intraocular lens power calculation. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2008; 34:368–76.
crossref
4. Olsen T, Thim K, Corydon L. Theoretical versus SRK I and SRK II calculation of intraocular lens power. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1990; 16:217–25.
crossref
5. Jeong JH, Kim SG, Lee HJ, et al. Theoretical and clinical abdominal of the Hoffer Q and SRK/T formulas. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2014; 55:85–92.
6. Moschos MM, Chatziralli IP, Koutsandrea C. Intraocular lens abdominal calculation in eyes with short axial length. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2014; 62:692–4.
7. Olsen T, Corydon L, Gimbel H. Intraocular lens power calculation with an improved anterior chamber depth prediction algorithm. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1995; 21:313–9.
crossref
8. Steinert RF. Cataract surgery. 3rd ed.Philadelphia: Philadelphia;2010. p. 39–47.
9. Lee JM, Oh TH, Kim HS. The changes in anterior chamber depth and refractive error associated with diverse intraocular lenses. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2013; 54:245–50.
crossref
10. Son SW, Seo JW, Shin SJ, Chung SK. Comparison of the stability between three-piece and single-piece aspheric intraocular lenses. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2010; 51:1584–9.
crossref
11. Wirtitsch MG, Findl O, Menapace R, et al. Effect of haptic design on change in axial lens position after cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004; 30:45–51.
crossref
12. Nejima R, Miyai T, Kataoka Y, et al. Prospective intrapatient abdominal of 6.0-millimeter optic single-piece and 3-piece abdominal acrylic foldable intraocular lenses. Ophthalmology. 2006; 113:585–90.
13. Behrouz MJ, Kheirkhah A, Hashemian H, Nazari R. Anterior abdominal parameters: comparison of 1-piece and 3-piece acrylic abdominal intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2010; 36:1650–5.
14. Kim HS, Lee DM, Ahn JM, et al. Comparison of anterior chamber parameter and refractive change between three-piece and single-piece aspheric intraocular lenses. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2012; 53:1789–93.
crossref
15. Lane SS, Burgi P, Milios GS, et al. Comparison of the abdominal behavior of foldable intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004; 30:2397–402.
16. Savini G, Barboni P, Ducoli P, et al. Influence of intraocular lens haptic design on refractive error. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2014; 40:1473–8.
crossref
17. Retzlaff JA, Sanders DR, Kraff MC. Development of the SRK/T intraocular lens implant power calculation formula. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1990; 16:333–40.
crossref
18. Hoffer KJ. The Hoffer Q formula: a comparison of theoretic and abdominal formulas. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1993; 19:700–12.
19. Landers J, Liu H. Choice of intraocular lens may not affect abdominal stability following cataract surgery. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2005; 33:34–40.
20. Kim DY, Kim MJ, Kim JY, Tchah H. Comparison of formulas for intraocular lens power calculation installed in a partial coherence interferometer. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2009; 50:523–8.
crossref
21. Aristodemou P, Knox Cartwright NE, Sparrow JM, Johnston RL. Formula choice: Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, or SRK/T and refractive outcomes in 8108 eyes after cataract surgery with biometry by abdominal coherence interferometry. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011; 37:63–71.
22. Lee AC, Qazi MA, Pepose JS. Biometry and intraocular lens power calculation. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2008; 19:13–7.
crossref

Table 1.
Preoperative demographic characteristics
  Group 1 Group 2 p-value
Number of patients (eyes) 38 (44) 24 (30)  
Age (years) 68.66 ± 5.06 67.03 ± 6.90 0.275*
Sex (male:female) 12:32 12:18 0.314†
Axial length (mm) 23.31 ± 0.72 23.25 ± 0.70 0.730*
Anterior chamber depth (mm) 3.04 ± 0.30 3.04 ± 0.39 0.974*
Preop mean K (D) 44.17 ± 1.23 44.53 ± 1.67 0.309*

Values are presented as mean ± standard deviations. Group 1: one piece lens type, Group 2: three piece lens type.

* Statistical significance were tested by Independent t-test

† Statistical significance were tested by Chi-square test.

Table 2.
Information of two intraocular lens subtypes and number of uses
  VA60BB AAB00
Optic type Spheric Spheric
A constant 118.4 118.7
Piece(s) 1 3
Optic size (mm) 6 6
Overall length (mm) 12.5 13
Haptic angulation 5 0
Material (optic/haptic) Hydrophobic Acrylic/ Hydrophobic Acrylic Hydrophobic Acrylic/PMMA
Eyes (numbers) 30 44

PMMA = Polymethyl methacrylate.

Table 3.
Comparison mean numeric errors between intraocular lens types according to intraocular lens power formulas (SRK/II, SRK/T, Hoffer Q)
  Group 1 (n = 44) Group 2 (n = 30) p-value*
Postop 1 day (diopter)      
  SRK/II (A) 0.34 ± 0.73 0.21 ± 0.66 0.397
  SRK/T (B) 0.50 ± 0.66 0.27 ± 0.57 0.109
  Hoffer Q (C) 0.56 ± 0.62 0.34 ± 0.60 0.137
  p-value† 0.307 0.688  
Postop 1 week (diopter)      
  SRK/II (A) –0.10 ± 0.47 0.11 ± 0.59 0.117
  SRK/T (B) 0.05 ± 0.46 0.17 ± 0.59 0.387
  Hoffer Q (C) 0.11 ± 0.49 0.24 ± 0.69 0.386
  p-value† 0.096 0.699  
Postop 1 month (diopter)      
  SRK/II (A) 0.05 ± 0.49 –0.17 ± 0.45 0.050‡
  SRK/T (B) 0.20 ± 0.46 –0.11 ± 0.39 0.003‡
  Hoffer Q (C) 0.27 ± 0.46 0.03 ± 0.49 0.011‡
  p-value† 0.093 0.496  
Postop 2 months (diopter)      
  SRK/II (A) –0.04 ± 0.44 –0.22 ± 0.53 0.131
  SRK/T (B) 0.12 ± 0.48 –0.16 ± 0.44 0.013‡
  Hoffer Q (C) 0.18 ± 0.51 –0.08 ± 0.54 0.042‡
  p-value† 0.099 0.577  

Values are presented as mean ± standard deviations unless otherwise indicated. Group 1: one piece lens type, Group 2: three piece lens type. Postop = post operation.

* Statistical significance were tested by Independent t-test

† Statistical significance were tested by Analysis of variance (ANOVA) test

‡ p < 0.05.

Table 4.
Comparison mean absolute errors between intraocular lens types according to intraocular lens power formulas (SRK/II, SRK/T, Hoffer Q)
  Group 1 (n = 44) Group 2 (n = 30) p-value*
Postop 1 day (diopter)      
  SRK/II (A) 0.60 ± 0.54 0.49 ± 0.48 0.357
  SRK/T (B) 0.63 ± 0.53 0.40 ± 0.48 0.060
  Hoffer Q (C) 0.66 ± 0.51 0.49 ± 0.49 0.146
  p-value† 0.869 0.698  
Postop 1 week (diopter)      
  SRK/II (A) 0.35 ± 0.33 0.46 ± 0.37 0.182
  SRK/T (B) 0.34 ± 0.32 0.34 ± 0.21 0.123
  Hoffer Q (C) 0.37 ± 0.34 0.37 ± 0.32 0.120
  p-value† 0.934 0.798  
Postop 1 month (diopter)      
  SRK/II (A) 0.36 ± 0.33 0.37 ± 0.30 0.977
  SRK/T (B) 0.39 ± 0.32 0.34 ± 0.21 0.429
  Hoffer Q (C) 0.42 ± 0.32 0.37 ± 0.32 0.535
  p-value† 0.723 0.890  
Postop 2 months (diopter)      
  SRK/II (A) 0.35 ± 0.25 0.46 ± 0.34 0.178
  SRK/T (B) 0.38 ± 0.32 0.37 ± 0.27 0.928
  Hoffer Q (C) 0.42 ± 0.34 0.44 ± 0.30 0.802
  p-value† 0.617 0.502  

Values are presented as mean ± standard deviations unless otherwise indicated. Group 1: one piece lens type, Group 2: three piece lens type. Postop = post operation.

* Statistical significance were tested by Independent t-test

† Statistical significance were tested by Analysis of variance (ANOVA) test.

TOOLS
Similar articles