Comparison of Four Lens Power Formulas for Sutureless Scleral-Fixated Carlevale Lens

Agnieszka Dyrda,1,2 Liliana Araujo-Diaz,1 Amanda Rey,1 Maria S Pighin,1 Marta Pazos,3 Ignasi Jürgens1 1Institut Català de Retina, Barcelona, Spain; 2Facultat de Medicina i Ciències de la Salut, Universitat de Barcelona (UB), Barcelona, Spain; 3Department of Ophthalmology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona (UB), Barcelona, Spain; Institut d’Investigacions Mèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, SpainCorrespondence: Agnieszka Dyrda, Institut Català de Retina, Ganduxer 117, Barcelona, 08022, Spain, Tel +34 93 378 23 19, Fax +34 93 418 78 57, Email [email protected]: To assess the predictability of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas for sutureless scleral fixation (SSF) of the Carlevale IOL.Methods: A prospective, single-center, interventional case series was conducted to compare predicted refractive outcomes using the SRK/T, Barrett II, Hoffer Q, and Holladay 1 formulas in patients undergoing SSF of the Carlevale IOL. The main outcomes included mean prediction error (PE), median absolute error (MedAE), mean absolute error (MAE), and the percentage of eyes with a PE within ± 0.50 and ± 1.0 diopters (D).Results: Sixty-nine eyes of 69 patients were included. Only the Barrett II formula resulted in a systematic myopic error (p=0.014). The PE of SRKT, HofferQ, and Holladay 1 was closer to 0, indicating that the post-operative refractive outcome was nearer to the predicted value than that of Barrett II (p=0.002, p< 0.001, p=0.003, respectively). MedAE and MAE ranged from 0.41 to 0.53 D and 0.6 to 0.67 D, respectively, without significant differences between the formulas. The percentages of eyes with PE within ± 0.50 and ± 1.00 D varied from 47.8 to 56.5% and 79.7 to 87%, respectively, showing no significant differences across the assessed formulas.Conclusion: The SRK/T, Hoffer Q, and Holladay 1 formulas provide favorable refractive outcomes for the SSF of Carlevale IOL. The Barrett II formula is less accurate and is not recommended due to its systematic myopic refractive error.Keywords: Carlevale IOL, sutureless scleral fixation, IOL power formula, refractive results, refractive prediction error

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Published
2025-10-01
Primary Topic
Fish Ecology and Management Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of Four Lens Power Formulas for Sutureless Scleral-Fixated Carlevale Lens

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Fish Ecology and Management Studies
article

Comparison of Four Lens Power Formulas for Sutureless Scleral-Fixated Carlevale Lens

article en

Abstract

Agnieszka Dyrda,1,2 Liliana Araujo-Diaz,1 Amanda Rey,1 Maria S Pighin,1 Marta Pazos,3 Ignasi Jürgens1 1Institut Català de Retina, Barcelona, Spain; 2Facultat de Medicina i Ciències de la Salut, Universitat de Barcelona (UB), Barcelona, Spain; 3Department of Ophthalmology, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona (UB), Barcelona, Spain; Institut d’Investigacions Mèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), Barcelona, SpainCorrespondence: Agnieszka Dyrda, Institut Català de Retina, Ganduxer 117, Barcelona, 08022, Spain, Tel +34 93 378 23 19, Fax +34 93 418 78 57, Email [email protected]: To assess the predictability of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation formulas for sutureless scleral fixation (SSF) of the Carlevale IOL.Methods: A prospective, single-center, interventional case series was conducted to compare predicted refractive outcomes using the SRK/T, Barrett II, Hoffer Q, and Holladay 1 formulas in patients undergoing SSF of the Carlevale IOL. The main outcomes included mean prediction error (PE), median absolute error (MedAE), mean absolute error (MAE), and the percentage of eyes with a PE within ± 0.50 and ± 1.0 diopters (D).Results: Sixty-nine eyes of 69 patients were included. Only the Barrett II formula resulted in a systematic myopic error (p=0.014). The PE of SRKT, HofferQ, and Holladay 1 was closer to 0, indicating that the post-operative refractive outcome was nearer to the predicted value than that of Barrett II (p=0.002, p< 0.001, p=0.003, respectively). MedAE and MAE ranged from 0.41 to 0.53 D and 0.6 to 0.67 D, respectively, without significant differences between the formulas. The percentages of eyes with PE within ± 0.50 and ± 1.00 D varied from 47.8 to 56.5% and 79.7 to 87%, respectively, showing no significant differences across the assessed formulas.Conclusion: The SRK/T, Hoffer Q, and Holladay 1 formulas provide favorable refractive outcomes for the SSF of Carlevale IOL. The Barrett II formula is less accurate and is not recommended due to its systematic myopic refractive error.Keywords: Carlevale IOL, sutureless scleral fixation, IOL power formula, refractive results, refractive prediction error

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
New England College of Optometry (US), American Optometric Association (US), College of Optometrists (GB), American Academy of Optometry (US), Ophthalmology Associates (United States) (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 40%
Fish Ecology and Management Studies
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.