[Accuracy comparison of total keratometry and standard keratometry in intraocular lens power calculations for post-corneal refractive surgery cataract patients].

<b>Objective:</b> To compare the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations using total keratometry (TK) versus standard keratometry (K) in post-corneal refractive surgery cataract patients. <b>Methods:</b> This retrospective case series study included 30 patients (36 eyes) with a history of laser corneal refractive surgery who underwent cataract extraction and IOL implantation at Qingdao Eye Hospital, Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, from September 2022 to December 2023. The cohort comprised 16 males and 14 females, with an average age of (53.6±8.1) years. IOL power was calculated using the K-based Haigis-L and Barrett True-K formulas, as well as the TK-based Haigis and Barrett Universal Ⅱ formulas. Postoperative objective refraction was performed to obtain the actual refractive status of the operated eyes. The refractive prediction error (RPE) was defined as the difference between the actual spherical equivalent and the predicted refraction. The absolute value of the RPE was taken as the refractive absolute error (RAE). Differences in errors calculated by the four formulas were compared. <b>Results:</b> TK showed good consistency with K, with TK being on average 0.50 D lower than K. Analysis of variance revealed statistically significant differences in RPE among the four formulas (<i>P</i><0.001). The RPE for the TK-based Haigis formula was (0.17±0.09) D, and for the Barrett Universal Ⅱ formula, it was (0.21±0.11) D, both significantly better than the K-based Haigis-L formula (-0.61±0.12) D and Barrett True-K formula (-0.57±0.11) D (all <i>P</i><0.001). The percentage of eyes with postoperative RPE<±1.00 D was higher for the TK-based Haigis (92%, 33 eyes) and Barrett Universal Ⅱ (86%, 31 eyes) formulas compared to the TK-based Barrett True-K (75%, 27 eyes) and Haigis-L formulas (67%, 24 eyes), with statistically significant differences (<i>P</i><0.05). <b>Conclusions:</b> Compared with K, TK improves the accuracy of IOL power calculation in post-corneal refractive surgery patients. Both the TK-based Barrett Universal Ⅱ and Haigis formulas demonstrate high accuracy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PubMed
Published
2024-08-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn112142-20240301-00090
Primary Topic
Corneal surgery and disorders
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

[Accuracy comparison of total keratometry and standard keratometry in intraocular lens power calculations for post-corneal refractive surgery cataract patients].

Yusen Huang, Xinji Wang, Jinling Ge, W J Su
PubMed
Corneal surgery and disorders
article

[Accuracy comparison of total keratometry and standard keratometry in intraocular lens power calculations for post-corneal refractive surgery cataract patients].

Yusen Huang, Xinji Wang, Jinling Ge, W J Su
article en

Abstract

<b>Objective:</b> To compare the accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculations using total keratometry (TK) versus standard keratometry (K) in post-corneal refractive surgery cataract patients. <b>Methods:</b> This retrospective case series study included 30 patients (36 eyes) with a history of laser corneal refractive surgery who underwent cataract extraction and IOL implantation at Qingdao Eye Hospital, Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, from September 2022 to December 2023. The cohort comprised 16 males and 14 females, with an average age of (53.6±8.1) years. IOL power was calculated using the K-based Haigis-L and Barrett True-K formulas, as well as the TK-based Haigis and Barrett Universal Ⅱ formulas. Postoperative objective refraction was performed to obtain the actual refractive status of the operated eyes. The refractive prediction error (RPE) was defined as the difference between the actual spherical equivalent and the predicted refraction. The absolute value of the RPE was taken as the refractive absolute error (RAE). Differences in errors calculated by the four formulas were compared. <b>Results:</b> TK showed good consistency with K, with TK being on average 0.50 D lower than K. Analysis of variance revealed statistically significant differences in RPE among the four formulas (<i>P</i><0.001). The RPE for the TK-based Haigis formula was (0.17±0.09) D, and for the Barrett Universal Ⅱ formula, it was (0.21±0.11) D, both significantly better than the K-based Haigis-L formula (-0.61±0.12) D and Barrett True-K formula (-0.57±0.11) D (all <i>P</i><0.001). The percentage of eyes with postoperative RPE<±1.00 D was higher for the TK-based Haigis (92%, 33 eyes) and Barrett Universal Ⅱ (86%, 31 eyes) formulas compared to the TK-based Barrett True-K (75%, 27 eyes) and Haigis-L formulas (67%, 24 eyes), with statistically significant differences (<i>P</i><0.05). <b>Conclusions:</b> Compared with K, TK improves the accuracy of IOL power calculation in post-corneal refractive surgery patients. Both the TK-based Barrett Universal Ⅱ and Haigis formulas demonstrate high accuracy.

PubMedVol. 60(8)
Shandong Eye Hospital (CN), Shandong First Medical University (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 82%
Corneal surgery and disorders
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.