Comparison of Prediction Accuracy of Four Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lens

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the prediction accuracy of four intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas; Barrett Universal II, SRK/T, Hoffer-QST, and Kane, using conventional keratometry (K) and total keratometry (TK) in patients who underwent implantation of a four-haptic hydrophobic multifocal IOL (Artis Symbiose Plus<sup>®</sup>).Methods: We analyzed 26 patients (32 eyes) who underwent cataract surgery with implantation of the Artis Symbiose Plus<sup>®</sup>. Preoperative biometric data, including axial length, keratometry, anterior chamber depth, and lens thickness, were measured using IOL Master 700<sup>®</sup>. Postoperative refractive outcomes were compared with the target refractive errors derived from four formulas with K and TK. The mean error, mean absolute error, and median absolute error were calculated at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. The results were compared between the formulae and K and TK.Results: At 3 months postoperatively, Barrett Universal II and Kane showed significantly lower refractive errors from the target diopter than SRK/T and Hoffer-QST, with Barrett Universal II showing the most hyperopic shift and SRK/T the most myopic than the target refractive error. No significant difference in refractive prediction was found between K and TK across all the formulas. The proportion of eyes with refractive errors within ± 0.50 diopter (D) and ± 1.00 D was highest for Barrett Universal II and Kane, with no statistical significance.Conclusions: Barrett Universal II and Kane provided superior refractive accuracy compared to SRK/T and Hoffer-QST for Artis Symbiose Plus<sup>®</sup>. There was no significant difference between K and TK in predicting refractive outcomes.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Annals of Optometry and Contact Lens
Published
2025-03-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.52725/aocl.2025.24.1.19
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.06
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of Prediction Accuracy of Four Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lens

Jun-Sik Kim, Sun Woong Kim
3 citations
Annals of Optometry and Contact Lens
Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
4.06
article

Comparison of Prediction Accuracy of Four Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas for Presbyopia-Correcting Intraocular Lens

Jun-Sik Kim, Sun Woong Kim
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the prediction accuracy of four intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas; Barrett Universal II, SRK/T, Hoffer-QST, and Kane, using conventional keratometry (K) and total keratometry (TK) in patients who underwent implantation of a four-haptic hydrophobic multifocal IOL (Artis Symbiose Plus<sup>®</sup>).Methods: We analyzed 26 patients (32 eyes) who underwent cataract surgery with implantation of the Artis Symbiose Plus<sup>®</sup>. Preoperative biometric data, including axial length, keratometry, anterior chamber depth, and lens thickness, were measured using IOL Master 700<sup>®</sup>. Postoperative refractive outcomes were compared with the target refractive errors derived from four formulas with K and TK. The mean error, mean absolute error, and median absolute error were calculated at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. The results were compared between the formulae and K and TK.Results: At 3 months postoperatively, Barrett Universal II and Kane showed significantly lower refractive errors from the target diopter than SRK/T and Hoffer-QST, with Barrett Universal II showing the most hyperopic shift and SRK/T the most myopic than the target refractive error. No significant difference in refractive prediction was found between K and TK across all the formulas. The proportion of eyes with refractive errors within ± 0.50 diopter (D) and ± 1.00 D was highest for Barrett Universal II and Kane, with no statistical significance.Conclusions: Barrett Universal II and Kane provided superior refractive accuracy compared to SRK/T and Hoffer-QST for Artis Symbiose Plus<sup>®</sup>. There was no significant difference between K and TK in predicting refractive outcomes.

Annals of Optometry and Contact LensVol. 24(1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
4.06
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.